Force Science Institute: Critical Scholarship & News Coverage

This page aggregates news coverage, legal proceedings, and academic research related to the Force Science Institute (FSI). It is maintained as a resource for researchers, attorneys, and policymakers examining the scientific foundations of use-of-force expert testimony.

About Force Science Institute

Force Science Institute is a private, for-profit entity that trains “Force Science Analysts” and provides expert testimony in police use-of-force cases. FSI-affiliated experts frequently testify in both criminal prosecutions of officers and civil rights litigation (such as 42 U.S.C. § 1983). FSI presents its work as peer-reviewed scientific research supporting concepts such as “action beats reaction,” “inattentional blindness,” and “slip and capture”—frameworks that shape jury deliberations, prosecutorial decisions, and police training curricula.

The organization was founded by William “Bill” Lewinski, who has testified as an expert witness in numerous high-profile police shooting cases.

Critical Research: Adams et al. (2025)

In “Forced Science: A Critical Appraisal of the Scientific Rigor of ‘Force Science’ Policing Research” (Police Quarterly, 2025), Adams, et al. assessed FSI’s self-selected corpus of 24 “peer-reviewed” (claimed) articles using three validated measures of scientific reliability: the Maryland Scientific Methods Scale, the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale, and the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.

Key findings:

• 58% of FSI-cited articles do not appear in journals recognized by Web of Science
• 42% were published in Law Enforcement Executive Forum, a non-scientific practitioner publication where Lewinski serves as Associate Editor
• Mean quality scores across all validated measures were less than 50% of possible benchmarks
• Studies consistently fail on sample size justification, convenience sampling, lack of confounder control, and inability to establish causal inference

Implications for Daubert admissibility: The four Daubert criteria for admissibility of scientific evidence — testability, peer review and publication, known error rates, and general acceptance in the scientific community — are systematically unmet by the FSI research corpus. These findings are relevant to Daubert and Frye challenges in police-involved (including use-of-force) litigation.

Critical Resources

Peer-Reviewed Research:

• Adams, et al., (2025). “Forced Science: A Critical Appraisal of the Scientific Rigor of ‘Force Science’ Policing Research.” Police Quarterly. DOI: 10.1177/10986111251357498

Investigative Journalism:

• Apuzzo, M. (2015, August 1). “Training Officers to Shoot First, and He Will Answer Questions Later.” The New York Times.

Conference Presentation and 2025 Debate:

In October 2025, Ian Adams debated Von Kliem (Force Science Chief Consulting & Communications Officer) at the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) annual conference, on the stage of the PERF Townhall, on the question of whether Force Science research meets scientific standards for courtroom testimony.

News Feed

This automated feed tracks news, legal proceedings, and developments related to Force Science Institute. Stories are categorized by type and relevance confidence.

Feed includes: Legal proceedings and Daubert/Frye challenges • Prosecutorial decisions citing FSI • Academic critiques • Investigative journalism • Policy developments • International coverage

Relevance confidence: High (explicit FSI/Lewinski mention) • Medium (FSI-affiliated concepts) • Low (contextual signals)

Subscribe: RSS Feed | Feed began January 2026