Probabilistic reporting and algorithms in forensic science: Stakeholder perspectives within the American criminal justice system

In recent years, there have been efforts to promote probabilistic reporting and the use of computational algorithms across several forensic science disciplines. Reactions to these efforts have been mixed—some stakeholders argue they promote greater scientific rigor whereas others argue that the opacity of algorithmic tools makes it challenging to meaningfully scrutinize the evidence presented against a defendant resulting from these systems. Consequently, the forensic community has been left with no clear path to navigate these concerns as each proposed approach has countervailing benefits and risks. To explore these issues further and provide a foundation for a path forward, this study draws on semi-structured interviews with fifteen participants to elicit the perspectives of key criminal justice stakeholders, including laboratory managers, prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges, and other academic scholars, on issues related to interpretation and reporting practices and the use of computational algorithms in forensic science within the American legal system.