Evaluating Scientific Evidence: An Interdisciplinary Framework for Intellectual Due ProcessCambridge University Press, 2007 - 254 páginas Scientific evidence is crucial in a burgeoning number of litigated cases, legislative enactments, regulatory decisions, and scholarly arguments. Evaluating Scientific Evidence explores the question of what counts as scientific knowledge, a question that has become a focus of heated courtroom and scholarly debate, not only in the United States, but in other common law countries such as the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia. Controversies are rife over what is permissible use of genetic information, whether chemical exposure causes disease, whether future dangerousness of violent or sexual offenders can be predicted, whether such time-honored methods of criminal identification (such as microscopic hair analysis, for example) have any better foundation than ancient divination rituals, among other important topics. This book examines the process of evaluating scientific evidence in both civil and criminal contexts, and explains how decisions by nonscientists that embody scientific knowledge can be improved. |
Contenido
Triers of science | 4 |
What is intellectual due process? | 17 |
A framework for analysis | 36 |
Toxic torts and the causation conundrum | 57 |
Criminal identification evidence | 94 |
Future dangerousness testimony The epistemology of prediction | 122 |
Barefoot or Daubert? A cognitive perspective on vetting future dangerousness testimony | 146 |
Future dangerousness and sexual offenders | 155 |
Models of rationality evaluating social psychology | 168 |
Evaluating battered woman syndrome | 203 |
Conclusion | 232 |
239 | |
Otras ediciones - Ver todas
Evaluating Scientific Evidence: An Interdisciplinary Framework for ... Erica Beecher-Monas Vista previa limitada - 2006 |
Evaluating Scientific Evidence: An Interdisciplinary Framework for ... Erica Beecher-Monas Sin vista previa disponible - 2006 |
Términos y frases comunes
actuarial instruments admissibility Amos Tversky analysis animal studies argument assumptions base rate basis battered woman syndrome behavior bias biological bitemark capital sentencing causation chemical clinical cognitive context criminal Daniel Kahneman Daubert Daubert standards death decision defendant defendant's determination disease domestic violence due process empirical epidemiology evaluating example excluded experimental expert testimony explaining exposure extrapolation factors Federal fingerprint forensic formaldehyde future dangerousness gatekeeping Gerd Gigerenzer group polarization human hypothesis identification individual judges judgment judicial jurors jury laboratory Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals methodology mtDNA observing overconfidence percent plaintiffs Popper population predictions probabilistic probability problem proffered PSYCHOL PTSD rational reasoning relevant reliability requirement Risk Assessment sample scientific evidence scientific validity scientists self-defense sexual social psychology standards statistical significance Supp supra note testify testing theory toxic tort trial U.S. Supreme Court underlying variables woman syndrome testimony women