Thinking fast and slow in the evaluation of injury plausibility in child protection

In evaluating injury in children, child protection paediatricians are tasked with determining whether the history given by parents or caregivers is valid with respect to explaining injury causation. This paper summarises metacognition and in particular the dual processing theory of 'fast and slow thinking' to explain how complex information in contexts of uncertainty is processed to produce decisions and responses, applied to a child protection context. An example is used that resembles abusive head trauma which focuses on understanding the difference between likelihood and plausibility in forensic interpretations of injury causation.