How Does a “Human Factor” Analysis Affect a Criminal Trial?

In layman’s terms, what is a “human factor” analysis?

Generally speaking, a human factor analysis (HFA) involves the study of the human being as a central part of a system or event. HFA may not only include an analysis of perception, behaviour, and outcomes under a significant activation of the sympathetic nervous system (“fight or flight”), but also the results associated with routine, repetitive or concurrent behaviours or tasks. HFA specifically addresses cognitive and physiological capabilities and limitations, physical actions and perceptions, errors, decision-making, memory and recall, and training methodology. Along with computer science, the study of human factors has been described as the most relevant science developed in the last fifty years.

How do these factors shape our behaviour?

Our behaviours and decisions are not only by produced by conditioning and training, but also through decision-making heuristics and the influences of the sympathetic nervous system (SNS). When the SNS is sufficiently stimulated, it will influence a subject’s focus, perception, senses, decision-making, speech, and memory recall. As the subject’s heart rate elevates with an SNS-stimulated response, their ability to respond is adapted accordingly. Complex motor skills begin to deteriorate. Depth perception and near and peripheral vision also become reduced (sometimes referred to as “tunnel vision”). Auditory exclusion may be present, as the brain excludes any sound it perceives as unnecessary to address the present focus or threat; subjects involuntarily ignore other sounds. Importantly, cognitive processing deteriorates, perhaps negatively influencing analysis, decision-making and outcomes.

Our behaviours and decisions are not only by produced by conditioning and training, but also through decision-making heuristics and the influences of the sympathetic nervous system (SNS).

When the event is recounted later, the subject may not only say they felt “fear,” but there is also a significant possibility that the subject and witnesses will be inaccurate in their perceptions and recall. Subjects have been suspected and/or are criminally charged because their statements are “not consistent with the evidence,” when if they were truthful in their statement of an involvement that may have included the stimulation of the SNS, inaccuracy could be expected in some degree.

What is the importance of these factors in determining culpability in a criminal case?

Is it reasonable to expect any person to act outside of the capabilities of human physiology, especially under a sympathetic nervous system response? Though utilised routinely by other industries and professions for error mitigation and within civil proceedings, the judicial system may utilise HFA only when evaluating law enforcement-related use-of-force incidents. It is less common that such understanding is applied to an investigation and evaluation of a civilian’s actions and intent.

Potentially, a prosecutorial team or defense firm could benefit from an objective understanding of human performance factors, ensuring their victims and clients receive the justice and effective service they deserve.

HFA can provide not only an affordable and important dimension to many cases, but may also become a routine component of strategy development, effective counsel, and practice.

Is it reasonable to expect any person to act outside of the capabilities of human physiology, especially under a sympathetic nervous system response?

How do you impart the necessary information about human factors and behaviour to jurors and counsel?

With juries, I typically explain the relevant factors, and then provide an example that most people will have experienced or understand. I also help counsel understand how inaccurate witness statements, faulty law enforcement conclusions, unsupported medical opinions, and other human factors may have influenced their case. 

What challenges do you often face as part of this work?

Outside of some civil proceedings, HFA appears to be less common in describing the intent and process of civilian acts of self-defense, intent, and error. Often, the greatest challenges involve providing awareness of the “science” that influences human perception and action.

How much of your work is done before going to trial? Does this differ from most expert witnesses?

A significant amount of my work and analysis is completed before trial. Law enforcement investigation conclusions and opposing expert opinions must be analysed and tested, and strategies developed. Generally, with an analysis of the physical conditions associated with an event, I prefer to personally experience them in the testing and report my observations from that perspective.

Bruce Champagne

Quadrant Operations LLC

9500 South 500 West, Ste. #213, Sandy, Utah 84070

Tel: +1 801-750-5452

E: quadrantoperations@gmail.com

Facebook: Quadrant Operations, LLC; Analyzing Law Enforcement Uses of Force

About Bruce Champagne

“I retired from a full career in law enforcement after completing assignments as a SWAT officer, field trainer, gang detective, defensive tactics and firearms instructor, underwater forensic investigator, and violent crimes detective. Prior to that, I worked as a commercial marine biologist/zoologist, and as a result, use a scientific approach in my investigations and training.

My company, Quadrant Operations, LLC, has been helping firms provide effective legal representation since 2012 with training, crime/event reconstruction, law enforcement investigation and operations review, human factors and crime analysis, specialized interviews, deception detection, and expert witness services. Frequently, we also provide analysis of civilian acts of self-defence and law enforcement uses-of-force, crime analysis involving incomplete or incorrect law enforcement investigations, event plausibility, incorrect medical diagnoses through bias and noise, and distorted memory and witness statements.”