Eyewitness testimony and epistemic agency

Noûs ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Lackey
Keyword(s):  
Eyewitness Testimony ◽  
Epistemic Agency

On the "general acceptance" of eyewitness testimony research: A new survey of the experts.

2001 ◽  
Vol 56 (5) ◽  
pp. 405-416 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saul M. Kassin ◽  
V. Anne Tubb ◽  
Harmon M. Hosch ◽  
Amina Memon
Keyword(s):  
Eyewitness Testimony ◽  
General Acceptance

Manipulation of Response Rate and Status in Eyewitness Testimony

1999 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dannie Sue Mezei ◽  
Frederick G. Grieve ◽  
Kristie Moore ◽  
Julie George
Keyword(s):  
Response Rate ◽  
Eyewitness Testimony

EPISTEMIC AGENCY: SOME DOUBTS

2013 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 179-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kieran Setiya
Keyword(s):  
Epistemic Agency

scholarly journals Founding Editorial – Forensics and TheScientificWorld

2001 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 605-608
Author(s):  
Walter Rowe
Keyword(s):  
Forensic Science ◽  
Forensic Toxicology ◽  
Forensic Odontology ◽  
Eyewitness Testimony ◽  
Scientific Application ◽  
Forensic Biology ◽  
Current State ◽  
Tool Mark ◽  
The World ◽  
Forensic Engineering

At the beginning of a new millennium it seems a good idea to stop for a moment and take stock of the current state of forensic science. As a field of scientific research and scientific application, forensic science is a little more than a century old. Forensic science may be said to have begun in 1887 with the simultaneous publication of A. Conan Doyle’s A Study in Scarlet and Hans Gross’s Handbuch für Untersuchungsrichter. Conan Doyle’s novel introduced to the world the character of Sherlock Holmes, whose literary career would popularize the use of physical evidence in criminal investigations. Gross’s manual for examining magistrates suggests ways in which the expertise of chemists, biologists, geologists, and other natural scientists could contribute to investigations. Gross’s book was translated into a number of languages and went through various updated editions during the course of the century. The intervening century saw the development and application of fingerprinting, firearm and tool mark identification, forensic chemistry, forensic biology, forensic toxicology, forensic odontology, forensic pathology, and forensic engineering. Increasingly, the judicial systems of the industrial nations of the world have come to rely upon the expertise of scientists in a variety of disciplines. In most advanced countries, virtually all criminal prosecutions now involve the presentation of scientific testimony. This has had the beneficial effect of diminishing the reliance of courts on eyewitness testimony and defendant confessions.

The Effects of Polygraph Evidence and Eyewitness Testimony on the Beliefs and Decisions of Mock Jurors

1992 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas P. Spanos ◽  
Bryan Myers ◽  
Susan C. Dubreuil ◽  
Anne E. Pawlak
Keyword(s):  
Small Groups ◽  
Eyewitness Testimony ◽  
Mock Jurors ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
Murder Trial

Mock jurors heard one of four versions of a murder trial and then deliberated in small groups to a verdict. Half the juries heard a trial in which an eyewitness identified the defendant as the murderer and half heard a trial in which a polygraph expert testified that the defendant responded deceptively when denying the crime. These two factors were completely crossed in a 2 × 2 (eyewitness/no eyewitness x polygraph/no polygraph) design. Jurors exposed to the eyewitness testimony believed more strongly in the defendant's guilt and voted guilty more frequently than did those not exposed to eyewitness testimony. Eyewitness testimony also enhanced the degree to which jurors believed that other pieces of evidence indicated that the defendant was guilty. Polygraph evidence exerted no significant effects either on jurors' beliefs or on their verdicts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document