Working Smarter on Cold Cases: Identifying Factors Associated with Successful Cold Case Investigations

Cold case squads have garnered much attention; however, they have yet to undergo significant empirical scrutiny. In the present study, the authors interviewed investigators and reviewed 189 solved and unsolved cold cases in Washington, D.C., to determine whether there are factors that can predict cold case solvability. In the interviews, new information from witnesses or information from new witnesses was cited as the most prevalent reason for case clearance. The case reviews determined that there were factors in each of the following domains that predicted whether cases would be solved during cold case investigations: Crime Context, Initial Investigation Results, Basis for Opening Cold Case, and Cold Case Investigator Actions. The results suggest that it is possible to prioritize cold case work based on the likelihood of investigations leading to clearances.     

Identifying and managing evaluator biases in parenting plan evaluations

Psychologists and other professionals are often appointed by the courts to assist families in resolving post-separation disputes and to assist judges in making orders on behalf of the best interests of the child(ren). Although these evaluations provide valuable information to the court, they require assessing areas of human behavior that are imprecisely defined or lacking professional consensus. As parents separate, their disputes may become more challenging, and they may act in uncharacteristic and unpredictable ways. Families that cannot solve their own challenges outside of court often show high levels of conflict and/or have issues that are extremely complex, including domestic violence allegations, resist-refuse family dynamics, and relocation requests. Evaluators and judges, being human, tend to oversimplify complex issues due to the limitations of the human brain. Evaluators are subject to cognitive biases that result from the use of mental heuristics, leading to shortcuts and errors in their reasoning and judgment. Other biases, such as implicit and explicit cultural biases, often influence evaluators' reasoning and conclusions. This article explores various biases that affect and potentially diminish the quality of an evaluator's work. We conclude by addressing “de-biasing” strategies that can reduce, but not negate, the risks associated with such biases.