skip navigation

Justinfo Subscribe to Stay Informed

Add your conference to our Justice Events calendar


NCJRS Abstract


Subscribe to Stay Informed
Want to be in the know? JUSTINFO is a biweekly e-newsletter containing information about new publications, events, training, funding opportunities, and Web-based resources available from the NCJRS Federal sponsors. Sign up to get JUSTINFO in your inbox.

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Library collection.
To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the NCJRS Abstracts Database.

How to Obtain Documents
NCJ Number: NCJ 242696     Find in a Library
Title: Inferential Source Attribution From Dust: Review and Analysis
Author(s): D. A. Stoney ; A. M. Bowen ; P. L. Stoney
  Journal: Forensic Science Review  Volume:25  Issue:1 & 2  Dated:March 2013  Pages:107 to 142
Date Published: 03/2013
Page Count: 36
  Annotation: The analysis of dust allows inference of exposures to geographical areas, environments, activities, and processes.
Abstract: This activity of inferential source attribution is distinguished from that of comparative source attribution, where the focus is on the degree of correspondence between two sources in relation to other possible sources. Review of source attribution efforts in the forensic and broader scientific literature show that most efforts are limited in one or more of four principal ways, which are classified as (a) methods based on attribution by direct comparison; (b) methods based on closed-set item classification; (c) analysis using restricted methods and characteristics; and (d) requirement of a large sample size. These limitations provide the context for the requirements of more generalized inferential source attribution. Occurring much more rarely, and almost exclusively in the forensic literature, are individual source attribution case reports that have a microscopical, multidisciplinary perspective. Collectively, these are an excellent illustration of potential and their common features demonstrated that (a) a diversity of laboratory expertise and methodology is required in order for source attribution to be successful; (b) different tools need to be applied in different cases; and (c) a process must be in place that allows a facile choice among this diversity of tools, in response in the particular investigative problem and the specifics of the samples that are available. Alternative collaborative mechanisms are considered, and recommendations are made for related research and programmatic application. (Published Abstract)
Main Term(s): Criminology
Index Term(s): Trace evidence ; Evidence identification and analysis ; Forensics/Forensic Sciences ; Investigative techniques
Type: Issue Overview
Country: Taiwan
Language: English
  To cite this abstract, use the following link:

* A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's web site is provided.