{"id":2325,"date":"2013-11-26T03:02:35","date_gmt":"2013-11-26T03:02:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/?p=2325"},"modified":"2013-11-26T03:02:35","modified_gmt":"2013-11-26T03:02:35","slug":"peer-review-in-forensic-engineering-and-civil-litigation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/2013\/11\/26\/peer-review-in-forensic-engineering-and-civil-litigation\/","title":{"rendered":"Peer review in forensic engineering and civil litigation"},"content":{"rendered":"

Peer review is needed <\/strong><\/h1>\n

We need peer review in forensic engineering to further ensure that the most thorough investigation is carried out and the most thorough, reliable, and objective\u00a0technical evidence, opinions, and explanations are provided the justice system.\u00a0 The court and counsel would learn from the knowledge and experience of more than one expert who would in a sense contribute\u00a0to a single opinion on the technical issues (Ref. 1).<\/p>\n

It’s\u00a0needed.\u00a0 I’ve read four poorly written ‘expert’ reports in the last while based on inadequate investigation and reasoning – really, very little investigation in most cases, and no reasoning\u00a0in all cases.<\/p>\n

It’s easy to include a\u00a0simple form of\u00a0peer review in forensic engineering<\/strong><\/p>\n

It would be easy to include a simple form of the peer review process in the investigation of a failure or accident in the built environment.\u00a0 As easy as getting\u00a0an independent\u00a0expert to simply read the report of the investigating expert.<\/p>\n

From that simple start,\u00a0gradually move to a more comprehensive process over time.\u00a0 I’m not quite sure at this stage\u00a0of my thinking how\u00a0a comprehensive peer review\u00a0process would work\u00a0in forensic engineering, but it would evolve because of\u00a0the need for it.<\/p>\n

Peer review will come in time because of civil procedure rules<\/strong><\/p>\n

The adoption of the peer review process\u00a0will\u00a0be driven in part by the increased emphasis on preparation of a report for the\u00a0justice system\u00a0– and less emphasis on discovery –\u00a0arising from civil procedure rules\u00a0such as Rule 55 in Nova Scotia.<\/p>\n

The rule spells out the requirements of the expert.\u00a0 They are exacting with respect to the expert being thorough, reliable, and objective, and reporting\u00a0his evidence and reasoning, and also\u00a0stating what other conclusions might have been drawn from\u00a0his evidence.<\/p>\n

The peer review process would seem to be essential\u00a0to further ensure that such a\u00a0requirement\u00a0is met\u00a0and the\u00a0justice system\u00a0and counsel are properly served.\u00a0 Professional engineering associations essentially set these same requirements for those practicing in the forensic geotechnical, foundation, and structural engineering fields (Ref. 2 to 5).<\/p>\n

The peer review process in science – the source for peer review in engineering<\/strong><\/p>\n

In science,\u00a0peer review\u00a0is the process by which an author or researcher’s\u00a0scholarly work is checked by a group of experts in the same field – his peers, people of similar qualifications, experience, and competence,\u00a0to make sure it meets the necessary standards before it is published or accepted (Ref.\u00a06).\u00a0 It constitutes a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field (Ref. 7).<\/p>\n

Put another way, peer review is specifically geared to\u00a0catch any potential biases of the primary examiner (the forensic engineer), to promote the examiner’s heightened diligence (promote thorough forensic investigation) to pursue each important clue (follow the evidence) and to recognize the clinical significance\u00a0as it surfaces (objectively accept the findings)\u00a0(Ref. 1). (my parenthetic additions)<\/span><\/p>\n

In science, publishers and editors of journals have identified\u00a0independent experts in different fields who are assigned to review submitted papers on the author’s research.\u00a0 The independent experts and the author may\u00a0be known\u00a0to one another or they may not.\u00a0 Or only the one may know of the other.<\/p>\n

Peer review has been\u00a0practised a very long time in science and is essential to obtaining good science.\u00a0\u00a0Forensic engineering\u00a0must receive the same rigid peer review\u00a0before going to the judge, jury, and counsel to further ensure they get\u00a0good forensic engineering..<\/p>\n

Peer review in forensic engineering<\/strong><\/p>\n

In forensic engineering, at least during initial implementation of the peer review\u00a0process, the independent expert, or experts,\u00a0would be\u00a0a consulting professional engineer –\u00a0a peer,\u00a0retained to\u00a0review the investigation and report by another engineer.\u00a0 Both engineers would be retained by the same party\u00a0involved in\u00a0the action but ideally from separate firms.<\/p>\n

The independent expert’s job would be to check that the forensic investigation was carried\u00a0out\u00a0according to the standard of care\u00a0existing at the time.\u00a0 Also, as\u00a0stated above in the introduction to this item,\u00a0to check and further ensure that “the most thorough investigation is carried out and the most thorough, reliable, and objective\u00a0technical evidence, opinions, and explanations are provided the justice system” in a well written report, a report that would also be reviewed by the independent expert.<\/p>\n

This checking of an engineering expert’s work by his or her peer would be easy to implement and would\u00a0constitute a simple form of peer review.\u00a0 It’s\u00a0recommended now in geotechnical, foundation, and structural engineering (Ref. 2 to 5).<\/p>\n

The final report by the investigating engineering expert would be his report alone because he would have\u00a0corrected any agreed deficiencies noted by\u00a0his peer.<\/p>\n

References<\/strong><\/h1>\n
    \n
  1. The Forensic Panel, Google<\/li>\n
  2. Lewis, Gary L. ed., Guidelines for Forensic Engineering Practice<\/em>, ASCE, the Association of Civil Engineers, Virginia, 2003<\/li>\n
  3. ASCE, Guidelines for Failure Investigation<\/em>, Virginia, 1989<\/li>\n
  4. Ratay, Robert T., Forensic Structural Engineering Handbook<\/em>, McGraw Hill, New York, 2000<\/li>\n
  5. ASFE, Association of Soil and Foundation Engineers, A Guide to Forensic Engineering and Service as an Expert Witness<\/em>, 1985<\/li>\n
  6. Merriam-Webster Dictionary, 2013<\/li>\n
  7. Wikipedia, Google<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

     <\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Peer review is needed We need peer review in forensic engineering to further ensure that the most thorough investigation is carried out and the most thorough, reliable, and objective\u00a0technical evidence, opinions, and explanations are provided the justice system.\u00a0 The court … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[16,17],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2325"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2325"}],"version-history":[{"count":27,"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2325\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2378,"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2325\/revisions\/2378"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2325"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2325"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2325"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}