# Episode 290 - Review of a Bias Research Paper

Page: https://stenobird.com/podcast/double-loop-podcast-169275/episode-290-review-of-a-bias-research-paper
Text version: https://stenobird.com/podcast/double-loop-podcast-169275/episode-290-review-of-a-bias-research-paper.md
Podcast: [Double Loop Podcast](https://stenobird.com/podcast/double-loop-podcast-169275)
Published: 2026-04-06T00:00:00+00:00
Episode link: https://soundcloud.com/double-loop-podcast/episode-290-review-of-a-bias
Audio file: https://feeds.soundcloud.com/stream/2297299532-double-loop-podcast-episode-290-review-of-a-bias.mp3
Processing state: not_requested
JSON: https://stenobird.com/v1/public/podcasts/double-loop-podcast-169275/episodes/episode-290-review-of-a-bias-research-paper
Duration seconds: 4723

## Resource

In this episode, the guys start off with some Michigan Regional Quirkisms. They then review a 2024 paper titled "The effects of cognitive bias, examiner expertise, and stimulus material on forensic evidence analysis" by Michelle Pena, Stephanie Stoiloff, Maria Sparacino, and Nadja Schreiber Compo, from the Journal of Forensic Sciences (2024; 69:1740-1757). The research paper provided lay participants (students) and fingerprint expert participants with images of ground truth, matching and non-matching fingerprint pairs. The researchers controlled the exposure of the participant to contextual case information. Lay participants made a number of errors and seemed to be more impacted by case information compared to experts in these trials. Glenn and Eric discuss why that might be and discuss and compare other studies that might be relevant on this topic. Article: Pena MM, Stoiloff S, Sparacino M, Schreiber Compo N. The effects of cognitive bias, examiner expertise, and stimulus material on forensic evidence analysis. J Forensic Sci. 2024 Sep;69(5):1740-1757. doi: 10.1111/1556-4029.15565. Other Articles Discussed: Tangen, J. M., Thompson, M. B., & McCarthy, D. J. (2011). Identifying fingerprint expertise. Psychological Science, 22(8), 995–997. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611414729 Langenburg, G., Bochet, F., & Ford, S. (2014). A Report of Statistics from Latent Print Casework. Forensic Science Policy & Management: An International Journal, 5(1–2), 15–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/19409044.2014.929759

## Actions

- request_transcript: `POST https://stenobird.com/v1/public/podcasts/double-loop-podcast-169275/episodes/episode-290-review-of-a-bias-research-paper/transcription-requests` — Idempotently request low-priority transcript generation for this episode.
- read_markdown: `GET https://stenobird.com/podcast/double-loop-podcast-169275/episode-290-review-of-a-bias-research-paper.md` — Read the agent-friendly Markdown representation of this episode resource.

A page view does not enqueue transcription. Agents should invoke `request_transcript` explicitly when they need this episode processed.

## Transcript

Full transcripts are not published on public pages unless there is a clear rights basis.