Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

"Cannot Decide": The Fine Line Between Appropriate Inconclusive Determinations Versus Unjustifiably Deciding Not To

Itiel E Dror1, Glenn Langenburg2

  • 1University College London, London, UK.

Journal of Forensic Sciences
|July 6, 2018
PubMed
Summary

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Examining human reliance on artificial intelligence in decision making.

Scientific reports·2026
Same author

Navigating the bias danger zone: Evaluating the (in)Efficiency of Linear Sequential Unmasking (LSU-E) as a bias countermeasure.

Forensic science international. Synergy·2026
Same author

Bloodstain Pattern Analysis (BPA): Validity, reliability, cognitive bias, and error rate.

Science & justice : journal of the Forensic Science Society·2025
Same author

Biased and Biasing: The Hidden Bias Cascade and Bias Snowball Effects.

Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)·2025
Same author

Human factors in triaging forensic items: Casework pressures and ambiguity aversion.

Science & justice : journal of the Forensic Science Society·2025
Same author

The role of alternative hypotheses in reducing bias in forensic medical experts' decision making.

Science & justice : journal of the Forensic Science Society·2023

Inconclusive decisions are valid outcomes of human cognition interacting with data. This study presents a cognitive model to determine when these decisions are justified, particularly in forensic science.

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Science
  • Forensic Science

Background:

  • Decisions are often viewed as binary choices, but 'inconclusive' outcomes are common.
  • Understanding the cognitive processes behind inconclusive decisions is crucial for expert domains.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To present a cognitive model for analyzing inconclusive decisions.
  • To identify circumstances where inconclusive decisions are justified or unjustified.
  • To address limitations of categorical decision-making with continuous data.

Main Methods:

  • Development of a cognitive model integrating data and human cognition.
  • Analysis of decision-making processes in expert domains, focusing on forensic fingerprinting.
  • Exploration of the continuum of data versus categorical decision-making.
Keywords:
cognitive forensicsdeciding not to decidedecision modelsfingerprint conclusionsforensic decision-makingforensic sciencehuman factorsinconclusive determinations

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • The cognitive model differentiates justified from unjustified inconclusive decisions.
  • Identified conditions under which caution and metacognition warrant inconclusive outcomes.
  • Highlighted problems with categorical approaches to continuous forensic data.

Conclusions:

  • Inconclusive decisions can be scientifically valid and reflect appropriate caution.
  • The proposed model offers a framework for evaluating decision-making in expert fields.
  • Solutions developed for forensic fingerprinting have broader applicability.