Search

The goal of this paper is to discuss scientific integrity, consumerism, conflicts of interest, and transparency within the context of forensic science. Forensic scientists play crucial roles within the legal system and are constantly under various pressures when performing analytical work, generating reports based on their analyses, or testifying to the content of these reports. Maintaining the scientific integrity of these actions is paramount to supporting a functional legal system and the practice of good science. Our goal is to discuss the importance of scientific integrity as well as the factors it may compromise, so that forensic practitioners may be better equipped to recognize and avoid conflicts of interest when they arise. In this discussion we define terms, concepts, and professional relationships as well as present three case studies to contextualize these ideas., (Copyright © 2019 The Chartered Society of Forensic Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

There is broad discussion of the higher numbers of women in the forensic sciences, particularly when compared to other science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields. In this discussion, we focus on forensic anthropology. We begin with an historical overview of the role of women in the discipline; data are then provided that outline the numbers of women scholars and practitioners over time. We then explore the different roles of men and women in regard to leadership positions, professional awards, awarded grant-funding, job hiring trends, presentations at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) annual meeting, and publications in the Journal of Forensic Sciences. While the number of women in forensic anthropology is greatly increasing, the discipline has been slow to also grow the visibility of women in positions of leadership or to honor them with prestigious awards. One reason for this finding may be that women are subjected to bias and harassment, which may cause them to leave forensic anthropology at various points along the way, or lead to their contribution being less valued. These findings are discussed within the context of gendered expectations, and suggestions are provided on how to improve the retention of women as well as to diversify the discipline in general. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most biological anthropologists acknowledge that phenotypic human variation is distinct from human race. However, there is the potential for the research on human variation to be (mis)interpreted by the public as a reification of biological races. To explore this possible misuse, this study is a content analysis of articles (n = 1146) in the prominent race science journals Mankind Quarterly; The Journal of Social, Political, and Economic Studies; and The Occidental Quarterly. The goal is to investigate how race science employs research in biological and forensic anthropology to justify arguments. Articles were evaluated according to country affiliation, discipline, data sets, racial/ethnic terminology, position on racial hierarchy, position on racial segregation and eugenics, focus of study, views of scientific community, and the average power index (PI). Additionally, specific examples of (mis)appropriation are highlighted. Though the primary discipline represented in these publications is psychology, biological anthropology maintains a presence. Skeletal and dental traits, genetics, and paleoanthropological data are used to argue for biological racial differences and taxonomic distinctions. The research of forensic ancestry estimation was regularly used to legitimize the concept of biological race. While the PIs of the articles are low, they are present on the internet and circulate within social media. The continued use of biological anthropology to reinforce racial essentialism should force practitioners to question the ethical implications of their research. Finally, we provide discussion regarding shifts in methodology and terminology to address how biological and forensic anthropologists can rectify the damage this research may directly and indirectly cause. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To understand the implications of the forensic anthropological practice of "ancestry" estimation, we explore terminology that has been employed in forensic anthropological research. The goal is to evaluate how such terms can often circulate within social contexts as a result, which may center forensic anthropologists as constituting "race" itself through analysis and categorization. This research evaluates terminology used in anthropological articles of the Journal of Forensic Sciences between 1972 and 2020 (n = 314). Terminology was placed into two categories: classifiers and descriptors. Classifiers were standardized into one of five options: "race," "ancestry," "population," "ethnic," or "other." Descriptors included terms used to describe individuals within these classificatory systems. We also compared these terms to those in the NamUs database and the U.S. census. Our results found that the terms "ancestry" and "race" are often conflated and "ancestry" largely supplanted "race" in the 1990s without a similar change in research approach. The NamUs and census terminology are not the same as that used in forensic anthropological research; illustrating a disconnect in the terms used to identify the missing, unidentified, and in social contexts with those used in anthropological research. We provide histories of all of these terms and conclude with suggestions for how to use terminology in the future. It is important for forensic anthropologists to be cognizant of the terms they use in medicolegal contexts, publications, and in public and/or professional spaces. The continued use of misrepresentative and improper language further marginalizes groups and perpetuates oppression rooted in systemic racism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The articles in this special issue grew from a symposium at the 2020 American Academy of Forensic Sciences Annual Scientific meeting, with the same title as this introduction. The symposium focused on current research and practice of ancestry estimation in forensic anthropology. The symposium concluded with a discussion of the value (or lack thereof) of ancestry estimation as a standard component of the forensic anthropological biological profile. The articles constituting this volume address these questions: What is the current state of race/ancestry estimation in practice? What terminology should we use to describe patterned variation among human populations? How do we sample contemporary populations, and how long are studies built on such samples applicable? What role does genomic data play? Should race/ancestry remain a core component of the biological profile? Further, the issue includes an examination of ancestry estimation in teaching and community outreach. While fine points are still up for debate among these authors, there is general agreement that any future of ancestry estimation must be based in cultural context and evolutionary theory, be sensitive to the importance of terminology employed, and be iteratively reflexive about the relative costs and benefits of this work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dental morphology is becoming increasingly visible in forensic anthropology as part of the estimation of ancestry. As methods are developed based on these data, it is important to understand the role of observer error in data collection and method application. In this study, 10 observers collected dental morphological data on 19 traits on the same set of nine plaques. Various measures of interrater reliability were calculated to assess observer error. Data were then input into one of three ancestry estimation methods based on dental morphology to understand the role of observer error in these methods. Results show low rater reliability for all dental morphological traits when all 10 observers are compared. Rater reliability increases when only experienced observers are compared and traits are dichotomized. Further, differences in trait scores by observers resulted in disparate estimations of ancestry in each of the methods. While observer error appears to be an issue in dental morphological methods of ancestry estimation, these problems can be addressed. An argument is made for advanced training in dental anthropology in laboratories and in graduate programs. Further, methods need to test for and employ traits with high rater agreement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study tests the relationship between third molar impaction and its concomitant effect on age estimation methods. Data were collected on radiographs of males analyzed in the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency Laboratory (n = 114). Radiographs of skeletonized individuals were scored for dental development, and age was assigned based on the appropriate ancestry‐based method. Differences between identified age and estimated dental age were assessed to determine whether molar impaction affected root development and age estimations. Results indicate that impacted teeth tend to be underdeveloped and result in age estimates that are too low. While these results are of note to anthropologists and odontologists performing dental age estimates, more work is needed to explore the effect of impaction on development among a more diverse sample. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of crown and root morphology to estimate population relationships has a long history in dental anthropology. Over the past two decades, methods employing dental morphology within forensic anthropology have been formalized with the incorporation of statistical models. This paper presents a new web-based application (rASUDAS) that estimates the ancestry of unknown individuals based on their suite of tooth crown and root traits. The application utilizes 21 independent traits that were scored following the Arizona State University Dental Anthropology System (ASUDAS). The reference sample represents approximately 30,000 individuals from seven biogeographic regions. A naive Bayes classifier algorithm was created in the R open source programming language to assign posterior probabilities for individual group assignment. To test the application, 150 individuals were selected from the C. G. Turner II database with the proviso that an individual had to be scored for a minimum of 12 of the 21 traits. In a seven-group analysis, the model correctly assigned individuals to groups 51.8% of the time. In a four-group analysis, classification accuracy improved to 66.7%. With three groups, accuracy was at 72.7%. It is still necessary to validate the program using forensic cases and to augment the reference sample with modern skeletal data. However, results from the beta version of rASUDAS are presented as proof of concept on the potential of dental morphology in ancestry estimation in forensic contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the hardest tissue in the body, teeth have the potential to offer a wealth of biological information to the forensic anthropologist, which can include the assessment of ancestry. Using a large data set of dental measurements, the efficacy of mesiodistal and buccolingual tooth dimensions to discriminate between broad, geographically based groups is explored. A general pattern is identified: African populations have the largest teeth, Asians possess teeth of intermediate size, and Europeans have the smallest teeth. In a discriminant function analysis using crown measurements of all teeth (mandibular and maxillary and excluding the third molar), individuals were correctly classified in 71.3% of cases. When the sex of the individual is known, classification is improved up to 88.1% in females and 71.9% of males (cross-validated). Based on these results, we argue that dental metrics can be regularly employed as part of the development of the biological profile. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article related to ethics and scholarship in forensic science in a March 2014 issue.

A glacial environment is a unique setting that can alter human remains in characteristic ways. This study describes glacial dynamics and how glaciers can be understood as taphonomic agents. Using a case study of human remains recovered from Colony Glacier, Alaska, a glacial taphonomic signature is outlined that includes: (1) movement of remains, (2) dispersal of remains, (3) altered bone margins, (4) splitting of skeletal elements, and (5) extensive soft tissue preservation and adipocere formation. As global glacier area is declining in the current climate, there is the potential for more materials of archaeological and medicolegal significance to be exposed. It is therefore important for the forensic anthropologist to have an idea of the taphonomy in this setting and to be able to differentiate glacial effects from other taphonomic agents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]