The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Cognitive bias and the order of examination in forensic anthropological non-metric methods: a pilot study
Open accessAbstract
Research has established that contextual information has the potential to influence the decisions of examiners in various forensic domains, including forensic anthropology. Studies have demonstrated that the non-metric sex estimation methods are susceptible to issues of cognitive bias, however the different types of stimuli that can influence the decision-making process remain understudied. As forensic anthropologists will examine multiple skeletal elements to estimate the sex of skeletal remains, a pilot study was designed to assess the potential of cognitive bias resulting from the order of examination. Two groups performed a non-metric sex estimation of the innominates and the skull with methods from Standards on one individual complete skeleton. Group A examined the skull first followed by the innominates, while Group B examined the innominates first followed by the skull. Results reveal a significant difference between the two groups in the sex estimation of the innominates and the complete skeleton (p = 0.020 and p = 0.022, respectively). This research demonstrates that order of examination for sex estimation may act as context and potentially influence the subsequent analyses. Additional research is necessary to broaden the understanding of decision-making and aid in the establishment of standard operating procedures designed to mitigate the potential effects of cognitive bias.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The role and impact of sequencing have been demonstrated in a number of domains (e.g., Darley & Gross, 1983; Lund, 1925), including in the justice and legal systems, e.g., jury deliberations (Carlson & Russo, 2001; Lawson, 1967).”
From Biased and biasing: the hidden bias cascade and bias snowball effects (2025) · cites this paper as Davidson et al., 2023
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 49
- 10.1016/j.scijus.2017.06.002 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.scijus.2019.08.006 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.scijus.2019.04.003 · DOI
- 10.1080/00450618.2017.1281348 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.01.016 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.scijus.2016.11.005 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/1556-4029.12805 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.forsciint.2005.10.017 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.scijus.2012.12.002 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.forsciint.2017.04.009 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.scijus.2016.08.003 · DOI
- 10.1111/1556-4029.13817 · DOI · Paper page
- Dror I, 2021, J Forensic Sci, 1556
- 10.1111/1556-4029.13091 · DOI
- 10.1111/1556-4029.13191 · DOI
- 10.1037/lhb0000066 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10979-010-9226-4 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.scijus.2020.01.005 · DOI
- Klales AR, 2016, 68th Annual Scientific Meeting of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, 188
- 10.1016/j.scijus.2013.11.003 · DOI
- 10.1111/1556-4029.13569 · DOI
- 10.1111/1556-4029.12473 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.scijus.2019.08.005 · DOI
- 10.1111/1556-4029.14265 · DOI
- 10.1080/00450618.2014.965204 · DOI
- 10.1111/1556-4029.13836 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jarmac.2013.01.001 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/14999013.2017.1317302 · DOI
- Klales AR, 2013, Am J Phys Anthropol, 96, 74
- Buikstra JE, 1994, Proceedings of a Seminar at the Field Museum of Natural History, Organized by Jonathan Haas, Third Printing
- 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00080.x · DOI
- 10.1002/ajpa.20776 · DOI
- 10.1080/00450618.2013.797026 · DOI
- 10.1017/CBO9780511978098.011 · DOI
- 10.1002/9781119226529.ch3 · DOI
- 10.1111/1556-4029.13496 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.scijus.2013.12.005 · DOI
- Burke AS, 2006, William Mary Law Rev, 45, 1587
- 10.1016/B978-0-12-815767-1.00006-7 · DOI
- 10.1002/ajpa.10012 · DOI
- 10.1002/ajpa.1330680103 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/BF02437238 · DOI · Paper page
- IBM SPSS, 2017, Statistics for Macintosh
- Brothwell DR, 1981, Digging up bones, 59
- Berg GE, 2013, Forensic anthropology: an introduction, 139
- 10.1021/acs.analchem.0c00704 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.scijus.2012.10.004 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.scijus.2017.06.003 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Biased and biasing: the hidden bias cascade and bias snowball effects
Dror, I. E. (2025) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs15040490 · Cited by 29
Metadata
- Authors
- Davidson, M., Nakhaeizadeh, S., & Rando, C.
- Affiliations
- University College London (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Davidson, Marion
- ORCID
- Davidson, Marion
- Venue
- Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2021-11-09
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 255-271
- ISSN
- 0045-0618 (ISSN-L)
- 1834-562X
- OpenAlex
- W3212830169
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2
- FWCI
- 8.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology (arts and humanities) › Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Insect Science › Forensic Entomology and Diptera Studies
- Keywords
- cognitive biases, forensic anthropology, skeletal remains, skull, innominate, decision-making, contextual factors, standard operating procedures
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review