Scientific Thinking About Legal Truth
Gal Rosenzweig
Frontiers in Psychology · 2022
doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.918282 (opens in a new tab)
We email you when a new notice or a question about this paper appears.
Abstract
In the criminal process, the fact finders assess the validity of impressions reported by witnesses based on their perceptions and determine what has happened in reality. However, these impressions are not subject to any external validity check. The Innocence Project revealed the failure of this subjective method and showed how it can lead to innocent convictions. The legal literature has examined ways to manage the risk of mistakes, but these ways are inconsistent with the scientific understanding of the need for external validity measurements, suggesting the need for new ways of thinking about the legal search for truth and justice.
Abstract licence: CC BY
References55
40 more references, whose wording the paper’s licence keeps private.
All 55 referencesReads
Read by people on this page
None yet.
Checked or read by AI through naulon
None yet.
A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.
Are you an author?
Is this your paper?
Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.