• About
  • Blog
  • Forensic Disciplines
    • Foundations of Forensics
    • Arson
    • Bite Mark
    • Blood & Bodily Fluids
    • Child Abuse Allegations
    • Crime Scene Investigation
    • Death by Distribution
    • Death Investigation
    • Detection Dogs
    • Digital Evidence
    • DNA
    • Drug Analysis
    • Drug Recognition Experts
    • Eyewitness ID
    • Fingerprints
    • Firearms
    • Forensic/Sexual Assault Exams
    • Measurement Uncertainty
    • Mental Health
    • Toxicology
    • Trace Evidence
  • Resources
    • Forensic Consultations
    • Books
    • Cases
    • Featured Articles
    • Legislation
    • Motions and Briefs
      • Discovery Motions
      • Funding for Experts
      • Motions for Appropriate Relief
      • Motions to Exclude Expert Testimony
      • Motions for Independent Testing
      • Motions to Preserve Evidence
      • Motions to Suppress
      • Analyst Certification Motions
    • Reports & Publications
    • Trainings
    • Websites
    • Forensic Terminology
    • Online Research Tools
  • Crime Labs
    • General Information
    • NC State Crime Lab Procedures
    • Charlotte Mecklenburg Crime Lab
    • CCBI Lab Procedures
    • NC OCME Toxicology Lab
    • Pitt Co. Sheriff’s Forensic Services
    • Sec. of State Digital Forensic Lab
    • Wilmington Police Dept Crime Lab
    • Private and Out-of-State Labs
  • News Articles
  • Experts
    • Browse All Experts
    • Working with Experts
    • Expert Services Project
    • Add or Update Expert Records
    • Find a Private Investigator
  • Subscribe
  • Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Forensic Resources

North Carolina Office of Indigent Defense Services

Header Right

MENUMENU
  • About
  • Blog
  • Forensic Disciplines
        • Foundations of Forensics
        • Arson
        • Bite Mark
        • Blood & Bodily Fluids
        • Child Abuse Allegations
        • Crime Scene Investigation
        • Death by Distribution
        • Death Investigation
        • Detection Dogs
        • Digital Evidence
        • DNA
        • Drug Analysis
        • Drug Recognition Experts
        • Eyewitness ID
        • Fingerprints
        • Firearms
        • Forensic/Sexual Assault Exams
        • Measurement Uncertainty
        • Mental Health
        • Toxicology
        • Trace Evidence
  • Resources
        • Forensic Consultations
        • Books
        • Cases
        • Featured Articles
        • Legislation
        • Reports & Publications
        • Trainings
        • Websites
        • Forensic Terminology
        • Online Research Tools
        • Motions and Briefs
          • Discovery Motions
          • Funding for Experts
          • Motions for Appropriate Relief
          • Motions to Exclude Expert Testimony
          • Motions for Independent Testing
          • Motions to Preserve Evidence
          • Motions to Suppress
          • Analyst Certification Motions
  • Crime Labs
    • General Information
    • NC State Crime Lab Procedures
    • Charlotte Mecklenburg Crime Lab
    • CCBI Lab Procedures
    • NC OCME Toxicology Lab
    • Pitt Co. Sheriff’s Forensic Services
    • Sec. of State Digital Forensic Lab
    • Wilmington Police Dept Crime Lab
    • Private and Out-of-State Labs
  • News Articles
  • Experts
    • Browse All Experts
    • Working with Experts
    • Expert Services Project
    • Add or Update Expert Records
    • Find a Private Investigator
  • Subscribe
You are here: Home / Resources / Inconclusive Decisions and Error Rates in Forensic Science

Inconclusive Decisions and Error Rates in Forensic Science

Training Date: February 27, 2024
NOTE: This training is now over.
View Training Details

Presented by Henry Swofford, PhD, Lead Scientist with the Forensic Science Research Program in the Special Programs Office at NIST

In recent years, there has been controversy relating to the treatment of inconclusive decisions in forensic feature comparison disciplines (e.g., friction ridge, firearms and toolmarks, footwear, tire tracks, and handwriting). While such discourse has spotlighted an important issue in forensic science, it has also conflated several issues and created ambiguity and disagreement within the forensic science community regarding how inconclusive decisions ought to be treated when considering the reliability of a method or outcomes of the method.

In this presentation, the presenter offers a brief review of the various viewpoints and suggestions that have been recently put forth, followed by a path forward that we believe more effectively addresses the issue surrounding the treatment of inconclusive decisions. Specifically, the presenter distinguishes between the contexts of “method conformance” and “method performance” as two distinct concepts but both of which are necessary for the determination of reliability.

Method conformance relates to assessments of whether the outcome of a method is the result of adherence to the procedure(s) that define the method. Method performance relates to measures that reflect the capacity of a method to effectively discriminate between different propositions of interest (e.g., between same source and different source comparisons). The speaker then discusses the different circumstances for which these contexts are applicable (method development, method validation, performance monitoring, and reporting results) and implications for the forensic science community.

Learning Outcomes

By the end of this webinar, you’ll better understand the:

  1. controversy surrounding inconclusive decisions in forensic science and their impact on error rate calculations.
  2. the concepts of method conformance and method performance and their role in determinations of reliability.
  3. way inconclusive decisions should be treated and how measures of performance should be presented.

Last Updated: April 4, 2024

Resource Category: Trainings

Resource Category: TrainingsResource Source: CSAFEForensic Discipline: Fingerprints, Firearms

Site Footer

The Forensic Resource Counsel provides assistance to North Carolina attorneys litigating scientific evidence issues.
Information provided on this website is for educational purposes and does not constitute legal advice.
Copyright © 2026 · Office of Indigent Defense Services · All Rights Reserved · Website by Tomatillo Design

Copyright © 2026 Forensic Resources · All Rights Reserved · Powered by Mai Theme