Refining the relevant population in forensic voice comparison – A response to Hicks et alii (2015) The importance of distinguishing information from evidence/observations when formulating propositions

Geoffrey Stewart Morrison*, Ewald Enzinger, Cuiling Zhang

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalLetter, comment or opinion

Abstract

Hicks et alii [Sci. Just. 55 (2015) 520–525. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2015.06.008] propose that forensic speech scientists not use the accent of the speaker of questioned identity to refine the relevant population. This proposal is based on a lack of understanding of the realities of forensic voice comparison. If it were implemented, it would make data-based forensic voice comparison analysis within the likelihood ratio framework virtually impossible. We argue that it would also lead forensic speech scientists to present invalid unreliable strength of evidence statements, and not allow them to conduct the tests that would make them aware of this problem.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)492-497
Number of pages6
JournalScience and Justice
Volume56
Issue number6
Early online date11 Jul 2016
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 11 Jul 2016

Keywords

  • Forensic voice comparison
  • Formulating propositions
  • Likelihood ratio
  • Relevant population
  • Reliability
  • Validity

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Refining the relevant population in forensic voice comparison – A response to Hicks et alii (2015) The importance of distinguishing information from evidence/observations when formulating propositions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this