Forensic scientists classify evidence in different ways and have specific ways of dealing with it. One major distinction is between physical and biological evidence. Physical evidence refers to any item that comes from a nonliving origin, while biological evidence always originates from a living being. The most important kinds of physical evidence are fingerprints, tire marks, footprints, fiberspaint, and building materials.
The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author s or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice.
No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.
PDF K Abstract In a hypothesis-and-theory paper, a functional approach to movement analysis in sports is introduced. Instead, movements are understood as the means to solve given tasks that in turn, are defined by to-be-achieved task goals. A functional analysis comprises the steps of 1 recognizing constraints that define the functional structure, 2 identifying sub-actions that subserve the achievement of structure-dependent goals, 3 explicating modalities as specifics of the movement execution, and 4 assigning functions to actions, sub-actions and modalities.
Regarding motor-control theory, a functional approach can be linked to a dynamical-system framework of behavioral shaping, to cognitive models of modular effect-related motor control as well as to explicit concepts of goal setting and goal achievement.
Finally, it is shown that a functional approach is of particular help for sports practice in the context of structuring part practice, recognizing functionally equivalent task solutions, finding innovative technique alternatives, distinguishing errors from style, and identifying root causes of movement errors.
Performance errors and a functional framework When it comes to the identification of performance errors in sports and physical education, on the teacher's or coach's side, a well-grounded idea is demanded on what kind of performance counts as an error and what kind of performance does not.
Thus, the question arises on how this idea can be underpinned. In this regard, it seems useful to distinguish, in the first place, errors An analysis of physical identification decision-making from errors that are related to the movement as a means of putting the decision into practice.
Failure can result from both because a good realization of a bad decision is to the same degree worthless as a bad realization of a good decision. In the following, only performance errors of the second kind will be considered further, meaning that the pursued perspective will be less rooted in the psychology of decision-making but more in a movement-scientific framework of motor control and learning.
Hence, for the issue at hand, the scope can be narrowed down in such a way that independent from the quality of decision-making, a well-grounded idea is demanded from the teacher's or coach's side on what kind of motor performance counts as an error and what kind of motor performance does not.
As it should become obvious over the following text, a functional approach to movement analysis provides a valuable tool for practitioners who are faced with exactly this problem of error identification.
The respective discussions are based on decades of work in German sport science conducted by the third author. However, in the paper at hand, the functional approach is presented to an international audience for the first time. Furthermore, the approach will be enriched by links made between the approach-specific starting point of the analysis of movement tasks and mechanisms that underlie the movement generation on the level of motor control.
Hence, from a motor-control perspective, this paper should also be understood as a contribution to relating psychological, internal control structures to the achievement of goals in the physical, external world.
When trying to identify errors in motor performance, unfortunately, this task turns out to be trivial in rare cases only. Error identification is easy if, for instance, well-defined rules are broken, for example, in track-and-field's long jump, the foul line at the end of the board is crossed by the jumper or, in tennis, the serve does not hit the service box.
Instead, the coach's task would be to identify the root cause of the error. In the vast majority of cases, however, the error is caused by the athlete him- or herself. Consequently, the coach is supposed to search for reasons why a particular action missed, for example, by not hitting the board or the service box.
Such athlete-related reasons might be found in a suboptimal execution, for instance, of the last steps before a jump or in an insufficient ball-toss height for the service. Hence, even in these trivial examples, performance errors have to be identified with respect to the athlete's motor performance.
As a matter of course, the same is true if rules are not broken but the resulting performance does not lead to a desired outcome, which means, that the jump was valid but not long enough to achieve a better rank or that the serve hit the service box but could easily be returned by the opponent.
If, in those cases, the unsatisfying outcome cannot be attributed to current limitations in physical or coordinative respect, the resulting performance has to be counted as underachievement, and thus, as an error made by the athlete him- or herself. Consequently, the coach is again in charge of finding the error's root cause.
Generally, an error can be defined as a deviation from a specific target. Thus, the teacher or coach needs to access two kinds of measures: At this point, it should be underlined that both values are often not easily gathered. In this respect, the analysis of the actual performance can be a hard task by itself, particularly in sports where movements are executed with high speed as it is true in fencing or ski jumping.Start studying Forensics Chapter 1.
Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools. Search. incorporates the principles of chemistry, physics, and geology to identify and compare physical evidence. Biology Unit. organization and analysis of information. Because of the analysis the identification is possible for the mechanical reaction based on the lesson I think it is physically and mentally possible 1 vote5/5(1).
Sep 10, · In a hypothesis-and-theory paper, a functional approach to movement analysis in sports is introduced.
In this approach, contrary to classical concepts, it is not anymore the “ideal” movement of elite athletes that is taken as a template for the movements produced by learners. Do you think the representations in the media of the identification and analysis of physical evidence are accurate based on the information you learned in this lesson?
Why or why not? -I believe that the tactics used in the media are based in truth, but are messed with to keep up the appearance of the plot. Lecture 1 MECH – Modelling, Simulation and Analysis of Physical Systems 6 Systems System: A collection of components which are coordinated together to perform a function A system is a defined part of the real world.
Interactions with the environment are described by inputs, outputs, and disturbances. Organic qualitative analysis involves four types of tests. 1. Measurement of physical properties includes determining refractive index, boiling points, melting points, and density.
|Critical Thinking and Physical Evidence | Essay Example||Forensic scientists classify evidence in different ways and have specific ways of dealing with it. One major distinction is between physical and biological evidence.|
|Physical Evidence | ashio-midori.com||Committed to the Crime Mary Maloney never meant to kill her husband.|
Solubility tests can suggest the size and polarity of an unknown compound and the presence of basic or acidic functional groups.