A Comparative Study on the Pattern of Forensic Illustrations

Abstract

     This study aimed to compare six forensic illustration presentation styles in terms of perceived satisfaction, perceived comprehension of autopsy findings, and suitability for public dissemination. Survey research by cross-sectional design was conducted using an online questionnaire administered to a purposive sample of 60 participants, including 30 forensic physicians and 30 legal professionals (investigators, lawyers, and prosecutors). The research instrument was a 5-point Likert scale questionnaire covering 8 evaluation criteria. The content validity was verified by three experts, yielding an Index of Item-Objective Congruence (IOC) of 0.96, and the reliability was tested using Cronbach's alpha coefficient, resulting in a value of 0.969. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and inferential statistics. Differences in mean scores across the six illustration styles for each of the eight evaluation criteria were examined using One-Way ANOVA or Welch's ANOVA, depending on the homogeneity of variance (Levene's Test), followed by Tukey HSD or Games-Howell post-hoc comparisons. The results revealed significant differences (p < .05) in suitability across styles. Style 6 (Color Shading with Details) achieved the highest mean scores across all criteria for both groups, indicating high to very high suitability. However, while Style 6 is the most effective for professional medico-legal communication, the study suggests that contextual adaptation—such as using simplified styles like Style 3—is recommended for public dissemination to address emotional and ethical considerations while maintaining essential information.