ASTM E678-07 (2013) PDF

Full title and description

ASTM E678-07 (reapproved 2013) — Standard Practice for Evaluation of Scientific or Technical Data. This practice provides guidance for scientists, engineers, and technical experts on identifying, analyzing, validating, and reporting scientific or technical data used to form expert opinions and conclusions, with particular relevance to forensic and incident investigations.

Abstract

This short practice establishes criteria and recommended professional practices for evaluating scientific and technical data that serve as acceptable bases for forming scientific or technical expert opinions. It describes requirements for stating and validating hypotheses, documenting methods and reasoning, assessing the quality and limitations of data, and presenting conclusions in a form understandable to non‑technical audiences while remaining evaluable by subject matter experts. The practice emphasizes professional judgment, traceable records of analysis, and the appropriate use of quantitative or probabilistic statements only when supported by sound analytical or statistical principles.

General information

• Status: Withdrawn (withdrawn without superseding document on January 14, 2022).
• Publication date: Current edition approved April 1, 2007; published June 2007; reapproved April 1, 2013 (R2013).
• Publisher: ASTM International.
• ICS / categories: 07.020 (Mathematics); 19.020 (Test conditions and procedures in general). Committee E30 — Forensic Sciences; Subcommittee E30.11 — Interdisciplinary Forensic Science Standards.
• Edition / version: Designation E678−07 (R2013) — originally issued 2007, reapproved 2013.
• Number of pages: 2 pages (concise practice document).

Scope

This practice establishes criteria for evaluating scientific and technical data and other relevant considerations that constitute acceptable bases for forming scientific or technical expert opinions. It provides generally acceptable professional guidance for performing evaluations and documenting conclusions; it does not replace professional judgment and recognizes that specific situations may require departures from the practice when justified. The practice is intended to assist investigators and reviewers in understanding and assessing analyses and opinions derived from technical data, and it cross‑references related ASTM practices for evidence collection and reporting where appropriate.

Key topics and requirements

• Criteria for identifying and validating hypotheses and judgmental criteria used in evaluations.
• Requirements for logical, traceable, and documented records of analysis and deduction.
• Guidance on quantification and the cautious use of numerical probability estimates only when supported by sound analytical or statistical methods.
• Assessment of data quality, limitations, and the suitability of data as a basis for opinions.
• Recommendations for clear presentation of conclusions for lay audiences while retaining technical evaluability.
• Emphasis on the need to reference related practices for evidence collection and incident reporting.

Typical use and users

Used by forensic scientists, technical experts, investigators, laboratory managers, peer reviewers, and attorneys who need to evaluate or review the scientific or technical basis for expert opinions. Typical applications include forensic case evaluations, incident and accident investigations, technical peer reviews, and preparation of expert reports where the validity, traceability, and defensibility of data analysis are critical.

Related standards

Commonly referenced ASTM practices include E620 (Practice for Reporting Opinions of Scientific or Technical Experts), E1188 (Practice for Collection and Preservation of Information and Physical Items by a Technical Investigator), E1020 (Practice for Reporting Incidents That May Involve Criminal or Civil Litigation), and other E30 committee documents on forensic procedures and reporting. The practice is developed under Committee E30 (Forensic Sciences), Subcommittee E30.11.

Keywords

evaluation, data validation, forensic science, expert opinion, hypothesis, traceability, documentation, data quality, reporting, ASTM E678

FAQ

Q: What is this standard?

A: ASTM E678-07 (R2013) is a short practice that provides guidance for the evaluation of scientific or technical data used to support expert opinions, especially in forensic and investigative contexts.

Q: What does it cover?

A: It covers criteria for identifying and validating hypotheses, documenting evaluation techniques, assessing data quality and limitations, appropriate use of quantitative statements, and presenting conclusions so they are understandable to lay audiences yet reviewable by experts.

Q: Who typically uses it?

A: Forensic practitioners, technical experts, laboratory personnel, investigators, peer reviewers, and legal professionals who need to evaluate or defend the scientific basis of conclusions and expert opinions.

Q: Is it current or superseded?

A: The practice was originally approved April 1, 2007, reapproved April 1, 2013 (R2013), and was withdrawn without a direct successor on January 14, 2022. Users should verify whether any newer committee guidance or other standards now cover the same topics.

Q: Is it part of a series?

A: Yes. It is an ASTM E-series practice developed by Committee E30 on Forensic Sciences and is commonly used alongside related E30 standards and practices (for example E620, E1188, E1020) that address reporting, evidence collection, and incident reporting.

Q: What are the key keywords?

A: Forensic evaluation, data validation, expert opinion, hypothesis validation, traceability, documentation, data quality, reporting.