Common or specific source, features or scores; it is all a matter of information

We show that the incorporation of any new piece of information allows for improved decision making in the sense that the expected costs of an optimal decision decrease (or, in boundary cases where no or not enough new information is incorporated, stays the same) whenever this is done by the appropriate update of the probabilities of the hypotheses. Versions of this result have been stated before. However, previous proofs rely on auxiliary constructions with proper scoring rules. We, instead, offer a direct and completely general proof by considering elementary properties of likelihood ratios only. We do point out the relation to proper scoring rules. We apply our results to make a contribution to the debates about the use of score based/feature based and common/specific source likelihood ratios. In the literature these are often presented as different ``LR-systems''. We argue that deciding which LR to compute is simply a matter of the available information. There is no such thing as different ``LR-systems'', there are only differences in the available information. In particular, despite claims to the contrary, scores can very well be used in forensic practice and we illustrate this with an extensive example in DNA kinship context.