How does a forensic anthropologist use math? - Answers

Forensic anthropologists use data gathered through anthropometric/osteometric methods to draw conclusions. For example, say they have the femur (thigh bone) of an unknown victim and they want to estimate that victim's height. The person can measure the femur, and then plug that measurement into a formula to give a rough estimate of the victim's height. The formula used is created by analyzing a huge osteometric database that contains measurements of the femur in individuals of known height. This is how they create the most accurate estimate. Of course, the quality of these databases varies, but the goal is always to use the most recent, most complete data possible. Luckily, much of this work is now done by computer software, which is a great time saver for the forensic anthropologist. However, it is still important to understand the math behind the software, and to be able to explain how it works to a jury. There are also mathematical formulas used to calculate decomposition rates which take into account temperature, but usually these are included. They are used to complement a more holistic analysis that takes into account unquantifiable factors, such as animal scavenging, perimorterm trauma, etc. Forensic anthropologists must also understand concepts in math. For example, you must be able to tell whether the sub pubic angle is greater than or less than 90 degrees, as this can help to determine whether the pelvis you're looking at is male or female. It's absolutely crucial to understand the significance of sample size in a study--this can help you determine whether the conclusions drawn from the study should be applied to your case, or whether more research is needed before you can draw a conclusion. Statistics in general are important--frequency plots, frequency distributions, and big tables full of numbers can be found in almost any journal article on forensic anthropology. Digital imaging advances are now allowing forensic anthropologists to analyze skeletal features mathematically, and therefore, more objectively. Increasing objectivity in forensic anthropology is very important, especially when the forensic anthropologist's conclusions have to hold up in court. It's easy to argue with the opinion that a skull has "delicate features" and is therefore probably female, but it's much harder to argue with osteometric measurements that give you an 88% likelihood the skull is female.