Trial by Mathematics: Precision and Ritual in the Legal Process

Tribe, Laurence H.

doi:10.2307/1339610

Cited by 527 publications

(235 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

222

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We do not claim that the two levels are analytically related, however; it is theoretically possible that 40. Thus we disagree with the general skepticism toward statistical evidence expressed by Tribe (1971).…”

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 79%

The Problematic Value of Mathematical Models of Evidence

Allen¹,

Pardo²

2007

The Journal of Legal Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses mathematical modeling of the value of particular items of evidence. We demonstrate that such formal modeling has only limited use in explaining the value of legal evidence, much more limited than those investigators who construct and discuss the models assume, and thus that the conclusions they draw about the value of evidence are unwarranted. This is done through a discussion of several recent examples that attempt to quantify evidence relating to carpet fibers, infidelity, DNA random-match evidence, and character evidence used to impeach a witness. This paper makes the following contributions. Most important, it is another demonstration of the complex relationship between algorithmic tools and legal decision making. Furthermore, at a minimum it highlights the need for both analytical and empirical work to accommodate the reference-class problem and the risk of failing to do so.

show abstract

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 79%

The Problematic Value of Mathematical Models of Evidence

Allen¹,

Pardo²

2007

The Journal of Legal Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the evidence is the same, subject jurors who hear about a violent crime are more likely to convict the defendant than those who hear about a relatively nonviolent crime. We can probably understand this result in terms of the notion of "disutilities" (Kaplan, 1968;Tribe, 1971). Most jurors wish to avoid certain consequences, namely convicting an innocent person and acquitting a guilty one.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of expert psychological testimony on the unreliability of eyewitness identification.

Loftus¹

1980

Journal of Applied Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the present research was to study the influence on jurors of expert testimony about eyewitness identification. In Experiment 1 240 students (all registered voters) acted as jurors and received evidence against a defendant in a violent or a nonviolent case. The major piece of prosecution evidence was the testimony of the eyewitness. Half of the jurors read about the testimony of a defense expert on the reliability of eyewitness identification, whereas half did not. Individual verdicts were reached. The results indicated that there were fewer convictions when expert testimony was permitted. In Experiment 2 120 students received evidence in a hypothetical violent crime and then deliberated injuries of 6 to reach a verdict for or against the defendant. Jurors who had read about the expert testimony spent much more time discussing the eyewitness account than did jurors who had not been presented with expert testimony. The results indicate that one consequence of presenting psychological expert testimony is an increase in the amount of attention that jurors give to eyewitness accounts, perhaps enhancing their scrutinization. Some pros and cons of the psychological expert testimony are discussed.

show abstract

“…Decision-makers who use statistical generalizations about crime, academic achievement, and so forth, to justify disadvantaging already disadvantaged populations are less likely to be lauded for their statistical savvy than they are to be condemned for their moral insensitivity [21,22]; (2) Heretical counterfactuals are 'what-if' assertions about historical causality (framed as subjective conditionals with false antecedents) that pass conventional tests of plausibility but that undercut religious or political ontologies. Hierarchical cultures are prone to treat counterfactuals as heretical if they reduce the conduct of higher-spiritual-status beings (messiahs, saints, founding leaders, etc.)…”

Section: Empirical Research Portraying People As Reliable Defenders Omentioning

confidence: 99%