Communicating forensic expert testimony
My doctoral research focuses on communicating forensic expert testimony. How should forensic experts communicate their decisions and expertise to non-experts, such as judges and jurors? What do these non-experts understand from expert's testimony and how do they evaluate it? My research involves applying a diagnostic model of decision-making to forensic testimony in order for experts to accurately communicate the reliability and accuracy of their decisions.
Open forensic science
As an open scientist, I am interested in how the open science movement relates to law and the forensic sciences in particular. Many forensic techniques have encountered considerable scrutiny over the past few decades — being criticised for having no real scientific basis. Similarly, scientific fields such as psychology are encountering a massive culture shift after concerns about the inability to replicate many phenomena. How can we apply the open science principles that are currently being adopted in psychology and other scientific fields to forensic science?