7 terms

C3 Evaluation of Hall and Player. 2008

Ethical as they all volunteered therefore automatic informed consent was given.
Also, for the high emotion context, the severity of the crime was emotional enough to provoke emotion but not to be emotionally scarring.
However, it could be argued that the participants were deceived.- they didn't that the "crime" was not real. This was to avoid demand characteristics. However, they were debriefed at the end.
Yes, it was ecologically valid as they were asked to do something they would typically do in their typical work environment. This allows the findings to be generalised.
However, could be argued that the because the crime not real, the consequences of them getting the fingerprint wrong wasn't enforced.
This is only externally valid for establishments that use the Bottom up fingerprinting process.
Sampling Technique.
More experts were used than Dror's study, making it more generalisable, and actual fingerprinting experts were used.
volunteered therefore automatic consent- ethical.
Useful, as we are now aware of the factors that can cause errors during fingerprinting procedures- such as being aware of the details of the case- , this will allow use to take act on finding solutions to limit these errors.
I.e solution: Kassin 2013- experts make a better judgement when they aren't aware of the case.
Useful as it can be generalised - only to establishments using the bottom-up
Free will/Deterministic.
Deterministic- if experts are aware of the case they make mistakes during the fingerprint matching process.
However, during this study it could be argued there are aspects of free will, as some people in the high emotion context said they stayed emotional detached. Therefore, they made the choice to not allow their emotions to affect their work- however to what extent?
The Bottom up approach is scientific as it uses basics first then goes in detail to build a suspect.
Due to quantitative data-nomial-chi squared, the hypothesis had the ability to be falsified: "the context does not affect the fingerprinting process". Adopting the null hypothesis.
Objective measures: either high or low emotion, either affected you or not- can be argued???
You don't know if its affected you: emotion could be in the subconscious affecting your behaviour: whether you make a match driven by emotions or you match detached from emotions- highlighting individual differences???
Reliable: Had independent judges stating that the fingerprints were unambigous. - findings valid.
Would be ethnocentric and biased to say that Bottom up approach is the better approach.