Introduction
Fire investigations are performed with the goal of establishing information on the circumstances, causes, and effects of fires. Professionals are trained to consider the context of each scene, gather clues, and determine the characteristics as a result of the observation. Needless to say, depending on the location and the source, different elements are taken into consideration. Nonetheless, it is essential to consider the scientific method to further formulate evidence-based conclusions and findings. The current paper exemplified the following steps within a fire investigation: problem definition and planning, data collection, analysis, hypothesis, and reporting. In certain cases, legal considerations and expert opinions are also required.
Problem Definition and Planning
The first step in fire investigations based on the scientific method is problem definition and planning. The investigator is notified that a fire incident has occurred and is given information that is available at the time (NFPA). This allows the specialist to plan and prepare for the physical investigation. For example, the required tools, personnel, and reporting measures can be established to ensure a timely and research-based approach to the incident.
Data Collection
The second step, according to the scientific method, is data collection. The fire investigator arrives at the scene and documents evidence that can be relevant to the case. Alongside documentation, evidence is collected that can be helpful in determining the fire source, circumstances, and contexts. An example is fire debris sampling to identify the presence or lack thereof of ignitable liquid (Ljungkvist & Thomsen, 2019). For evidence-based findings, it is essential to gather and effectively preserve all acquired evidence to ensure the investigation is not disrupted.
Analysis and Hypothesis
After the evidence is collected, it is necessary to analyze it. The investigator conducts relevant tests if necessary and examines the data that has been acquired. As a result, an assumption can be formulated. The hypothesis is an idea of the source of the fire and its nature (NFPA). Experiments can be required to test the theory, depending on the case. During this stage, more awareness of such elements as the fire progression, accelerants, patterns, and characteristics is developed. The expert has a deeper insightfulness concerning the hazard and can paint a picture of the event, including the main traits of its development. The analysis and presumption step allows for a comprehensive understanding of what happened at the scene and how the incident occurred in the first place.
Reporting
After the establishment of a hypothesis and its testing, the expert has enough basis to report of the findings. The account includes the conclusions that have been formulated after all the factors were considered. This implies that the investigator’s level of certainty concerning the described incident and its traits is high and plausible (NFPA). Despite the fact that errors can occur, the statements are to be as evidence-based as possible, which is why the expertise of the investigator, as well as the analysis of evidence, are to be well-defined.
Quality Control and Legal Considerations
Quality control and legal considerations are necessary in many fire occurrences. Quality control is established through the opinion of additional experts and is often the case for court proceedings (NFPA). Additionally, experts can be invited to testify in court under the circumstances that the fire episode has led to the involvement of legal entities. This, however, does not occur in each investigation, which contrasts with the aforementioned elements of the scientific technique.
Conclusion
The scientific method is an evidence-based way to investigate fires. The investigator identifies the problem, establishes a plan, gathers and preserves evidence from the scene, examines the data, formulates a hypothesis, and writes a report. For incidents examined during court proceedings, fire investigators gather expert opinions and can be asked to testify on behalf of the findings. The approach is valid and supported by relevant scientific and legislative contexts, which implies risk reduction and minimization and validity disturbances.
References
Ljungkvist, E., & Thomsen, B. (2019). Interpretation of a fire scene with ultraviolet light. Forensic Science International, 297, 284–292. Web.
NFPA. (n.d.). Nature of fire investigations. Web.