Do inconclusive forensic decisions disadvantage the innocent?

OBJECTIVE: Two experiments examined the potential for inconclusive forensic decisions to disadvantage the innocent. HYPOTHESES: Both experiments tested the hypothesis that inconclusive decisions produce more incriminating legal judgments than do clearly exculpatory forensic decisions. Experiment 2 also examined whether this hypothesized effect conformed to a confirmation bias, a communication error, or perceptual accuracy. METHOD: In Experiment 1 (N = 492), a forensic expert testified that physical evidence recovered from a crime scene either matched or did not match a suspect's evidence or produced an inconclusive result. In Experiment 2 (N = 1,002), a forensic expert testified that physical evidence recovered from a crime scene either matched or did not match a suspect's evidence, produced an inconclusive result, or was unsuitable for analysis. A fifth condition omitted the forensic evidence and expert testimony. RESULTS: The inconclusive decision produced less incriminating legal judgments than did the match forensic decision (|d|average = 0.96), more incriminating legal judgments than did the no-match forensic decision (|d|average = 0.62), and equivalent legal judgments to the unsuitable decision (|d|average = 0.12) and to legal judgments made in the absence of forensic evidence (|d|average = 0.07). These results suggest that participants interpreted the inconclusive decision to be forensically neutral, which is consistent with a communication error. CONCLUSION: The findings provide preliminary support for the idea that inconclusive decisions can put the innocent at risk of wrongful conviction by depriving them of a clearly exculpatory forensic decision. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

The power of meaningful numbers: Attorney guidance and jury deliberation improve the reliability and gist validity of damage awards.

OBJECTIVE: A mock jury experiment tested the effects of attorney guidance and jury deliberation to mitigate the challenges that civil juries face in assessing damages. HYPOTHESES: We hypothesized that two types of attorney guidance (per diem, per diem + lump sum), theoretically based in the Hans-Reyna model of jury decision making, would improve jury decision making compared with no guidance against five key benchmarks: injury assessment, validity, reliability, verbatim-gist coherence, and metacognitive experience. We expected that deliberation would increase reliability of, confidence in, and polarization of awards compared with predeliberation. METHOD: Community members (N = 317; 61% women; 86.1% White; Mage = 48.68 years) deliberated in 54 mock juries. Participants watched a videotaped trial involving an automobile accident in which two plaintiffs sustained concussions (one mild and one severe). The plaintiffs' attorney's closing arguments varied attorney guidance (no guidance, per diem, per diem + lump sum). Mock jurors provided individual judgments before deliberating as a jury and reaching group verdicts and awards. RESULTS: Juries performed well against benchmarks. Providing gist-based guidance with a meaningful award recommendation increased the validity of jurors' individual damage awards (η²p jurors = .03) and the reliability of jury damage awards (η²p jurors = .04; η²p jurors = .20); gist-based guidance without an award recommendation did not improve performance against benchmarks and increased perceptions of decision-making difficulty (η²p = .13). Deliberation increased reliability of (η²p = .17), confidence in (η²p = .02), and polarization of (d = 2.14) awards compared with predeliberation. CONCLUSION: Juries performed well against objective benchmarks of performance (injury assessment, validity, reliability, and verbatim-gist coherence), and deliberation improved performance compared with predeliberation decisions. Jury decisions were further influenced by attorney closing arguments (the guidance manipulation), especially when the attorney requests a lump sum, which can serve as a powerful influence on jury awards, mainly by setting an upper limit. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Legal actors' and laypersons' utility judgments of eyewitness lineup procedures and outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Recent attempts to model the relative performances of eyewitness lineup procedures necessarily include theoretical assumptions about the various costs/benefits, or utilities, of different identification outcomes. We collected data to incorporate empirically derived utilities into such modeling as well as data on various stakeholders' views of lineup procedures as tertiary objectives. HYPOTHESES: This research was exploratory; therefore, we did not have a priori hypotheses. METHOD: We surveyed judges' (n = 70), prosecutors' (n = 28), police officers' (n = 82), and laypersons' (n = 191) opinions about eyewitness identification procedures and the utilities of outcomes of eyewitness identification procedures. We incorporated the utility judgments into models comparing the desirability of various lineup reforms and compared policy preferences between our samples. RESULTS: All samples frequently mentioned estimator and system variables in open-ended evaluations of lineup procedures, but legal samples mentioned system variables more often than did laypersons. Reflector variables (e.g., confidence) were mentioned less often across the board, as was the scientific basis/standardization of identification policy (especially among laypersons). Utility judgments of various identification outcomes indicated that judges adopt values more closely aligned with normative legal ethics (i.e., the Blackstone ratio), whereas other stakeholders (especially laypersons) depart significantly from those standards. Utility models indicated general agreement among samples in lineup procedure preferences, which varied as a function of culprit-presence base rates. CONCLUSION: Although legal stakeholders vary in how they value eyewitness identification outcomes, their values imply relatively consistent policy preferences that sometimes depart from scientific recommendations. Nonetheless, all samples expressed support for using scientific research to inform legal policy regarding eyewitness evidence. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Neural correlates of metacognition: Disentangling the brain circuits underlying prospective and retrospective second-order judgments through noninvasive brain stimulation.

Metacognition encompasses the capability to monitor and control one's cognitive processes, with metamemory and metadecision configuring among the most studied higher order functions. Although imaging experiments evaluated the role of disparate brain regions, neural substrates of metacognitive judgments remain undetermined. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize and discuss the available evidence concerning the neural bases of metacognition which has been collected by assessing the effects of noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) on human subjects' metacognitive capacities. Based on such literature analysis, our goal is, at first, to verify whether prospective and retrospective second-order judgments are localized within separate brain circuits and, subsequently, to provide compelling clues useful for identifying new targets for future NIBS studies. The search was conducted following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines among PubMed, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, PSYNDEX, MEDLINE, and ERIC databases. Overall, 25 studies met the eligibility criteria, yielding a total of 36 experiments employing transcranial magnetic stimulation and 16 ones making use of transcranial electrical stimulation techniques, including transcranial direct current stimulation and transcranial alternating current stimulation. Importantly, we found that both perspective and retrospective judgments about both memory and perceptual decision-making performances depend on the activation of the anterior and lateral portions of the prefrontal cortex, as well as on the activity of more caudal regions such as the premotor cortex and the precuneus. Combining this evidence with results from previous imaging and lesion studies, we advance ventromedial prefrontal cortex as a promising target for future NIBS studies.

A noise audit of human-labeled benchmarks for machine commonsense reasoning.

With the advent of large language models, evaluating and benchmarking these systems on important AI problems has taken on newfound importance. Such benchmarking typically involves comparing the predictions of a system against human labels (or a single 'ground-truth'). However, much recent work in psychology has suggested that most tasks involving significant human judgment can have non-trivial degrees of noise. In his book, Kahneman suggests that noise may be a much more significant component of inaccuracy compared to bias, which has been studied more extensively in the AI community. This article proposes a detailed noise audit of human-labeled benchmarks in machine commonsense reasoning, an important current area of AI research. We conduct noise audits under two important experimental conditions: one in a smaller-scale but higher-quality labeling setting, and another in a larger-scale, more realistic online crowdsourced setting. Using Kahneman's framework of noise, our results consistently show non-trivial amounts of level, pattern, and system noise, even in the higher-quality setting, with comparable results in the crowdsourced setting. We find that noise can significantly influence the performance estimates that we obtain of commonsense reasoning systems, even if the 'system' is a human; in some cases, by almost 10 percent. Labeling noise also affects performance estimates of systems like ChatGPT by more than 4 percent. Our results suggest that the default practice in the AI community of assuming and using a 'single' ground-truth, even on problems requiring seemingly straightforward human judgment, may warrant empirical and methodological re-visiting.

The effect of task load, information reliability and interdependency on anticipation performance.

In sport, coaches often explicitly provide athletes with stable contextual information related to opponent action preferences to enhance anticipation performance. This information can be dependent on, or independent of, dynamic contextual information that only emerges during the sequence of play (e.g. opponent positioning). The interdependency between contextual information sources, and the associated cognitive demands of integrating information sources during anticipation, has not yet been systematically examined. We used a temporal occlusion paradigm to alter the reliability of contextual and kinematic information during the early, mid- and final phases of a two-versus-two soccer anticipation task. A dual-task paradigm was incorporated to investigate the impact of task load on skilled soccer players' ability to integrate information and update their judgements in each phase. Across conditions, participants received no contextual information (control) or stable contextual information (opponent preferences) that was dependent on, or independent of, dynamic contextual information (opponent positioning). As predicted, participants used reliable contextual and kinematic information to enhance anticipation. Further exploratory analysis suggested that increased task load detrimentally affected anticipation accuracy but only when both reliable contextual and kinematic information were available for integration in the final phase. This effect was observed irrespective of whether the stable contextual information was dependent on, or independent of, dynamic contextual information. Findings suggest that updating anticipatory judgements in the final phase of a sequence of play based on the integration of reliable contextual and kinematic information requires cognitive resources.

Probabilistic causal reasoning under time pressure.

While causal reasoning is a core facet of our cognitive abilities, its time-course has not received proper attention. As the duration of reasoning might prove crucial in understanding the underlying cognitive processes, we asked participants in two experiments to make probabilistic causal inferences while manipulating time pressure. We found that participants are less accurate under time pressure, a speed-accuracy-tradeoff, and that they respond more conservatively. Surprisingly, two other persistent reasoning errors-Markov violations and failures to explain away-appeared insensitive to time pressure. These observations seem related to confidence: Conservative inferences were associated with low confidence, whereas Markov violations and failures to explain were not. These findings challenge existing theories that predict an association between time pressure and all causal reasoning errors including conservatism. Our findings suggest that these errors should not be attributed to a single cognitive mechanism and emphasize that causal judgements are the result of multiple processes.

GRADE guidance 37: rating imprecision in a body of evidence on test accuracy.

OBJECTIVES: To provide guidance on rating imprecision in a body of evidence assessing the accuracy of a single test. This guide will clarify when Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) users should consider rating down the certainty of evidence by one or more levels for imprecision in test accuracy. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A project group within the GRADE working group conducted iterative discussions and presentations at GRADE working group meetings to produce this guidance. RESULTS: Before rating the certainty of evidence, GRADE users should define the target of their certainty rating. GRADE recommends setting judgment thresholds defining what they consider a very accurate, accurate, inaccurate, and very inaccurate test. These thresholds should be set after considering consequences of testing and effects on people-important outcomes. GRADE's primary criterion for judging imprecision in test accuracy evidence is considering confidence intervals (i.e., CI approach) of absolute test accuracy results (true and false, positive, and negative results in a cohort of people). Based on the CI approach, when a CI appreciably crosses the predefined judgment threshold(s), one should consider rating down certainty of evidence by one or more levels, depending on the number of thresholds crossed. When the CI does not cross judgment threshold(s), GRADE suggests considering the sample size for an adequately powered test accuracy review (optimal or review information size [optimal information size (OIS)/review information size (RIS)]) in rating imprecision. If the combined sample size of the included studies in the review is smaller than the required OIS/RIS, one should consider rating down by one or more levels for imprecision. CONCLUSION: This paper extends previous GRADE guidance for rating imprecision in single test accuracy systematic reviews and guidelines, with a focus on the circumstances in which one should consider rating down one or more levels for imprecision.

Faculty Development on the Use of a Clinical Judgment Model in the Pre-licensure Nursing Curriculum.

Clinical judgment is an essential component of safe nursing practice that pre-licensure nursing students should develop by graduation from accredited nursing programs. For novice nurses, the consequences of underdeveloped clinical judgment skills that do not meet the demands of clinical practice are serious. This theory-practice gap correlates with increased numbers of errors occurring during care delivery, resulting in poorer patient outcomes. From a student perspective, this problem correlates with lower first-time pass rates on the NCLEX licensing exam. For nurse educators, there are uncertainties about how to resolve this complex and costly problem, but faculty development is one evidence-based solution to explore. The purpose of this article is to describe a three-pronged quality improvement project consisting of: 1) a faculty development session to teach faculty to implement the National Council State Boards of Nursing's Clinical Judgment Model (CJM) in their courses; 2) the use of the Clinical Judgment Tool; and 3) the implementation of a faculty champion to sustain and maintain ongoing faculty momentum to foster clinical judgment. This article focuses on how faculty can develop their own CJM faculty development session and use a CJM across the course curriculum.

Forming Evaluations of Moral Character: How Are Multiple Pieces of Information Prioritized and Integrated?

Evaluating other people's moral character is a crucial social cognitive task. However, the cognitive processes by which people seek out, prioritize, and integrate multiple pieces of character-relevant information have not been studied empirically. The first aim of this research was to examine which character traits are considered most important when forming an impression of a person's overall moral character. The second aim was to understand how differing levels of trait expression affect overall character judgments. Four preregistered studies and one supplemental study (total N = 720), using five different measures of importance and sampling undergraduates, online workers, and community members, found that our participants placed the most importance on the traits honest, helpful, compassionate, loyal, and responsible. Also, when integrating the information that they have learned, our participants seemed to engage in a simple averaging process in which all available, relevant information is combined in a linear fashion to form an overall evaluation of moral character. This research provides new insights into the cognitive processes by which evaluations of moral character are formed.

Contextual cueing during lethal force training: How target design and repetition can alter threat assessments.

Lethal force training requires individuals to make threat assessments, which involves holistic scenario processing to identify potential threats. Photorealistic targets can make threat/non-threat judgments substantially more genuine and challenging compared to simple cardboard or silhouette targets. Unfortunately, repeated target use also brings unintended consequences that could invalidate threat assessment processes conducted during training. Contextually rich or unique targets could be implicitly memorable in a way that allows observers to recall weapon locations rather than forcing observers to conduct a naturalistic assessment. Experiment 1 demonstrated robust contextual cueing effects in a well-established shoot/don't-shoot stimulus set, and Experiment 2 extended this finding from complex scene stimuli to simple actor-only stimuli. Experiment 3 demonstrated that these effects also occurred among trained professionals using rifles rather than computer-based tasks. Taken together, these findings demonstrate the potential for uncontrolled target repetition to alter the fundamental processes of threat assessment during lethal force training.

Time and memory distrust shape the dynamics of recollection and belief-in-occurrence.

The current study examined how people's metamemory judgments of recollection and belief-in-occurrence change over time. Furthermore, we examined to what extent these judgments are affected by memory distrust - the subjective appraisal of one's memory functioning - as measured by the Memory Distrust Scale (MDS) and the Squire Subjective Memory Scale (SSMQ). Participants (N = 234) studied pictorial stimuli and were tested on some of these stimuli later in the same session, but were tested on other stimuli 1, 2, 4, 8, and 17 days later. Recollection and belief ratings were correlated highly and followed similar declining patterns over time. However, belief decreased relatively more slowly than recollection, such that the discrepancy between recollection and belief increased over time. Memory distrust moderated the association between recollection and belief, with this association being weaker among people who reported greater (versus lower) memory distrust. Memory distrust also interacted with retention period to predict memory judgments. Two measures of memory distrust diverged in their predictive power. In particular, only the MDS predicted the spontaneous reporting of nonbelieved memories. Our results provide support to the theoretical perspective that belief-in-occurrence is a summative judgment informed not only by recollective phenomenology but also by metamemorial beliefs.

How stable are moral judgements? A longitudinal study of context dependency in attitudes towards patient responsibility.

BACKGROUND: Whether patients' life-style should involve lower priority for treatment is a controversial question in bioethics. Less is known about clinicians' views. AIM: To study how clinical doctors' attitudes to questions of patient responsibility and priority vary over time. METHOD: Surveys of doctors in Norway in 2008, 2014, 2021. Questionnaires included statements about patients' lifestyle's significance for priority to care, and vignettes of priority cases (only in 2014). RESULTS: Attitudes were fairly stable between 2008 and 2021. 17%/14% agreed that patients' lifestyle should count, while 19%/22% agreed that it should involve lower priority to scarce organs. 42/44% agreed that smokers should have lower priority. Substantially more agreed in 2014. Regression analyses showed that being male, working in hospital, and younger age increased the likelihood of agreeing. CONCLUSION: A substantial minority of doctors agreed that lifestyle should be a priority criterion, possibly contrary to Norwegian legislation and professional ethics. The finding might be explained by the unspecified meaning of priority, increased scarcity-awareness, or socio-cultural trends towards individualism. The 2014 results indicate a framing effect; the vignettes may have primed the respondents towards accepting lifestyle as a criterion. We conclude that attitudes to normative questions are unstable and depend on context. A substantial minority of doctors seems to be positive to deprioritizing patients allegedly responsible for their illness. However, what deprioritization implies in practice is not clear.

Looking at Mental Images: Eye-Tracking Mental Simulation During Retrospective Causal Judgment.

How do people evaluate causal relationships? Do they just consider what actually happened, or do they also consider what could have counterfactually happened? Using eye tracking and Gaussian process modeling, we investigated how people mentally simulated past events to judge what caused the outcomes to occur. Participants played a virtual ball-shooting game and then-while looking at a blank screen-mentally simulated (a) what actually happened, (b) what counterfactually could have happened, or (c) what caused the outcome to happen. Our findings showed that participants moved their eyes in patterns consistent with the actual or counterfactual events that they mentally simulated. When simulating what caused the outcome to occur, participants moved their eyes consistent with simulations of counterfactual possibilities. These results favor counterfactual theories of causal reasoning, demonstrate how eye movements can reflect simulation during this reasoning and provide a novel approach for investigating retrospective causal reasoning and counterfactual thinking.

Influence of Social Distance on Foreign Language Effect in Moral Judgment.

Previous research has shown that moral choice depends on language, a phenomenon known as the moral foreign language effect (mFLE). The current study examines the influence of social distance on the mFLE. In Experiment 1, 200 participants were randomly assigned to either close or distant social distance in English or Chinese. In Experiment 2, 188 participants were randomly assigned to either English or Chinese and were presented with eight moral dilemmas, each with five different levels of social distance. After reading the dilemma, participants made a choice on a binary scale (Yes/No) in both Experiments 1 and 2 or on a more sensitive 100-point scale in Experiment 2. The results showed that the mFLE was present in distant social distance but absent in close social distance. Finally, a meta-analysis of the results from both studies confirmed the effect of social distance on the mFLE. These findings demonstrate that social distance might play an important role in moderating the mFLE in moral judgment.

Incorporating a situational judgement test in residency selections: clinical, educational and organizational outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Computer-based assessment for sampling personal characteristics (Casper), an online situational judgement test, is a broad measure of personal and professional qualities. We examined the impact of Casper in the residency selection process on professionalism concerns, learning interventions and resource utilization at an institution. METHODS: In 2022, admissions data and information in the files of residents in difficulty (over three years pre- and post- Casper implementation) was used to determine the number of residents in difficulty, CanMEDS roles requiring a learning intervention, types of learning interventions (informal learning plans vs. formal remediation or probation), and impact on the utilization of institutional resource (costs and time). Professionalism concerns were mapped to the 4I domains of a professionalism framework, and their severity was considered in mild, moderate, and major categories. Descriptive statistics and between group comparisons were used for quantitative data. RESULTS: In the pre- and post- Casper cohorts the number of residents in difficulty (16 vs. 15) and the number of learning interventions (18 vs. 16) were similar. Professionalism concerns as an outcome measure decreased by 35% from 12/16 to 6/15 (p < 0.05), were reduced in all 4I domains (involvement, integrity, interaction, introspection) and in their severity. Formal learning interventions (15 vs. 5) and informal learning plans (3 vs. 11) were significantly different in the pre- and post-Casper cohorts respectively (p < 0.05). This reduction in formal learning interventions was associated with a 96% reduction in costs f(rom hundreds to tens of thousands of dollars and a reduction in time for learning interventions (from years to months). CONCLUSIONS: Justifiable from multiple stakeholder perspectives, use of an SJT (Casper) improves a clinical performance measure (professionalism concerns) and permits the institution to redirect its limited resources (cost savings and time) to enhance institutional endeavors and improve learner well-being and quality of programs.

Uncertain Facts or Uncertain Values? Testing the Distinction Between Empirical and Normative Uncertainty in Moral Judgments.

People can be uncertain in their moral judgments. Philosophers have argued that such uncertainty can either refer to the underlying empirical facts (empirical uncertainty) or to the normative evaluation of these facts itself (normative uncertainty). Psychological investigations of this distinction, however, are rare. In this paper, we combined factor-analytical and experimental approaches to show that empirical and normative uncertainty describe two related but different psychological states. In Study 1, we asked N = 265 participants to describe a case of moral uncertainty and to rate different aspects of their uncertainty about this case. Across this wide range of moral scenarios, our items loaded onto three reliable factors: lack of information, unclear consequences, and normative uncertainty. In Study 2, we confirmed this factor structure using predefined stimulus material. N = 402 participants each rated eight scenarios that systematically varied in their degree of uncertainty regarding the consequences of the described actions and in the value conflict that was inherent to them. The empirical uncertainty factors were mainly affected by the introduction of uncertainty regarding consequences, and the normative uncertainty factor was mainly affected by the introduction of value conflict. Our studies provide evidence that the distinction between empirical and normative uncertainty accurately describes a psychological reality. We discuss the relevance of our findings for research on moral judgments and decision-making, and folk metaethics.

Structural explanations lead young children and adults to rectify resource inequalities.

Decisions about how to divide resources have profound social and practical consequences. Do explanations regarding the source of existing inequalities influence how children and adults allocate new resources? When 3- to 6-year-old children (N = 201) learned that inequalities were caused by structural forces (stable external constraints affecting access to resources) as opposed to internal forces (effort), they rectified inequalities, overriding previously documented tendencies to perpetuate inequality or divide resources equally. Adults (N = 201) were more likely than children to rectify inequality spontaneously; this was further strengthened by a structural explanation but reversed by an effort-based explanation. Allocation behaviors were mirrored in judgments of which allocation choices by others were appropriate. These findings reveal how explanations powerfully guide social reasoning and action from childhood through adulthood.

The relationship between autistic traits, expressiveness, readability and social perceptions.

This study investigated the relationship between autistic traits, expressiveness, readability (both actual and perceived), social favourability, and likability. Sixty participants designated as 'targets' were video recorded in a range of social scenarios and their autistic traits were measured using the Autism Spectrum Quotient. The videos were then shown to 106 new participants designated 'perceivers', who were split into three groups to make judgments related to readability, expressiveness, and social favourability respectively. Mediation analyses revealed that autistic traits negatively impacted both perceived likeability and social favourability, mediated by lowered expressiveness. Autistic traits also directly impacted readability, which was not mediated by expressiveness. The findings show how the level of autistic traits of a target can influence how they are socially perceived by others.

Children's and adults' evaluations of self-enhancement and self-deprecation depend on the usual performance of the self-presenter.

This study examined how evaluations of self-presentation vary with age depending on the self-presenter's usual performance. People's usual performance is a key factor because it generally influences the social evaluations and judgments that others make about them. Children aged 7 and 8 years (second graders) and 10 and 11 years (fifth graders), as well as adults, were presented with scenarios in which protagonists responded to praise after a good performance using either self-enhancement or self-deprecation. The other person in scenarios knew that the protagonist's usual performance on the task was either good or poor. After the protagonist responded to praise in a self-enhancing or self-deprecating way, the participants judged how the other person would evaluate the protagonist's ability (good/poor) and character (nice/mean). For ability evaluations specifically concerning protagonists who usually performed poorly, the results showed that by around 10 years of age children no longer tended to give more positive ability evaluations for self-enhancement than for self-deprecation. Adults gave less positive ability evaluations for self-deprecation than for self-enhancement, but only when the protagonists usually performed well. In relation to the character evaluations, by around 10 years of age self-enhancement led to less positive character evaluations than self-deprecation, but only when the protagonists usually performed poorly. Overall, second graders evaluated self-presenters as more competent and nicer. These results indicate that the expected evaluation of self-enhancement and self-deprecation is influenced by the usual level of performance but that there are developmental changes in this aspect of social cognition.