What is (or will be) Happening to the Cognitive Abilities of Forensic Experts in the New Technological Age

Sir, Forensic science, like many other expert domains (e.g., medicine and military), has seen a dramatic increase in the use of technology. Technology is playing an increasing role in forensic science, working alongside the human examiners. In some cases the human examiner is “offloading” onto the technology (1), whereas in other cases the examiner is collaborating and sharing the work as partners (2), and thus cognition is distributed between the forensic examiners and the technological apparatus. Such advances have greatly benefited forensic science, enabling it not only to do the work faster and more efficiently but also to accomplish tasks that were not ever possible in the pretechnological age. For example, Automated Fingerprint Identification Systems (AFIS) have revolutionized the ability of fingerprint experts to find a match among millions of prints stored in large databases. In a study published in JFS (3) potential problems in using AFIS have been examined, particularly as they related to metadata biasing the judgment and decision making of the human examiners. However, the increased use of technology hides other, perhaps more dangerous, problems. For example, how the use of technology may affect cognitive abilities of the human examiners. The human brain and cognitive system are very adaptive and dynamic. They respond and develop to meet environmental demands. With the introduction of technologies, as we offload human capacity onto technology, we use those abilities less and less (if at all). A potential consequence of this is that those cognitive abilities deteriorate (if not disappear altogether)—see (4). Take, for example, the increased use of global positioning systems and electronic maps. They are definitely useful in finding where you are and giving you directions of how to get to where you need to go. However, as we use them more and more, our own cognitive ability to read and use maps is decreasing (e.g., finding out where we are on a map, orienteering, etc.). Before the mass introduction and use of technological navigation, we developed and used the cognitive abilities that enabled us to use maps. However, as we use these abilities less and less, those abilities decline (4). This is applicable to those of us who were accustomed to using maps in the pretechnological age. Those who are born into the technological age may never develop such abilities in the first place. Is this relevant to forensic science? Very much so. For example, in the pre-AFIS age human examiners would go over thousands of ten-print cards. Such work demands undoubtedly have contributed to the development of their expertise as expert fingerprint examiners. With the increased use of AFIS, examiners no longer get such experience and exposure. With this dramatic change in work, what happens to those cognitive abilities (both to those who once had them but no longer use them, and perhaps more so to those who come into the profession in this technological age and never get such experience and exposure)? It may be the case that such experience and abilities are no longer needed (just as one can argue that the ability to read and use maps is no longer needed). However, it may be that the ability to fully use AFIS and other technology is built on such abilities. If you consider spelling, it may be that there is much less need to learn how to spell in the technological age of automatic spell checkers. However, knowing how to spell may be important for developing brain structures that capture communalities and regularities across words, which are important for language. It is hard to understand and predict the long-term cognitive implications of using and relying on technology. What is clear is that the increased use of technology affects our cognitive abilities, technology is acting as an evolutionary force that shapes our abilities (4). Because of the great importance of forensic science, and the extensive use of technology (which is bound to increase in the future), we must consider the implications of using such technologies. Any danger in using technologies should not deter us from adopting technologies, but may have implications to how we use them and the training we give examiners so they develop the abilities that underpin expertise.