Cargando…
Scientific Thinking About Legal Truth
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 subj...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9298174/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35874415 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.918282 |
_version_ | 1784750644236648448 |
---|---|
author | Rosenzweig, Gal |
author_facet | Rosenzweig, Gal |
author_sort | Rosenzweig, Gal |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9298174 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92981742022-07-21 Scientific Thinking About Legal Truth Rosenzweig, Gal Front Psychol Psychology 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. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-07-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9298174/ /pubmed/35874415 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.918282 Text en Copyright © 2022 Rosenzweig. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Psychology Rosenzweig, Gal Scientific Thinking About Legal Truth |
title | Scientific Thinking About Legal Truth |
title_full | Scientific Thinking About Legal Truth |
title_fullStr | Scientific Thinking About Legal Truth |
title_full_unstemmed | Scientific Thinking About Legal Truth |
title_short | Scientific Thinking About Legal Truth |
title_sort | scientific thinking about legal truth |
topic | Psychology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9298174/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35874415 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.918282 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT rosenzweiggal scientificthinkingaboutlegaltruth |