Nonetheless, qualitative research improves the richness of data through understanding the how’s and why’s of research outcomes. This essay focuses on forensic science biases, as it explores several studies on bias in forensic science and aims to understand some of its causes, consequences, and resolutions. It combines qualitative and quantitative research in answering these research questions.
Cognitive bias is present in forensic science, and it must be recognized and accepted in the field, in order for it to be properly resolved. Cognitive bias pertains to the psychological tendency of supporting one opinion over another because of access to extraneous information; in other words, it is bias that comes from “knowing something” (Page, Taylor, & Blenkin, 2012, p.108). In “Cognitive Bias in Forensic Science,” Gianelli (2010) studied the impact of cognitive bias on forensic analysis through reviewing quantitative studies. After examining existing studies on cognitive bias issues, he was alarmed that experimental studies indicated that numerous forensic scientists portray widespread cognitive bias. Apparently, their expertise (when present) is not always enough to shield them from cognitive bias. He stressed the importance of conducting additional studies in understanding the causes, nature, and directions of cognitive bias. Furthermore, cognitive bias cannot be entirely avoided because forensic experts are human beings who can be psychologically and cognitive swayed by their emotions and other information or conditions. Page, Taylor, and Blenkin (2012) confirmed the existence of cognitive bias in forensic science and importance of its acknowledgment in their article, “Context Effects and Observer Bias-Implications for Forensic Odontology.” Using diverse qualitative and quantitative studies, they underscored