In courtroom settings, judges, jurors, and lawyers are often required to interpret probabilistic information presented by forensic experts, yet this type of reasoning can be challenging without statistical expertise. While forensic experts are increasingly encouraged to report the accuracy and reliability of their methods, misunderstandings of these metrics may lead factfinders to overvalue or undervalue the strength of the evidence, potentially resulting in miscarriages of justice. My PhD investigates when and why such misunderstandings occur, and explores strategies to improve comprehension of error and uncertainty in forensic expert reports.

I am interested in applying my research in the forensic context because it is an area of high-stakes decision-making. However, similar issues in interpreting probabilistic information also apply to contexts such as medical decision-making, public education, or even just understanding daily weather reports.