Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Richard Friedman (1994)
Conditional Probative Value: Neoclassicism without MythMichigan Law Review, 93
D. Keller (2001)
An almost perfect murder: The saga of Michael Franklin
T. D. Lyon, J. J. Koehler (1996)
The relevance ratio: Evaluating the probative value of expert testimony in child sexual abuse casesCornell Law Review, 82
R. Posner, R. Posner (1999)
An Economic Approach to the Law of EvidenceStanford Law Review, 51
J. Koehler, Audrey Chia, S. Lindsey (1995)
The Random Match Probability (RMP) in DNA Evidence: Irrelevant and Prejudicial?Evidence & Evidentiary Procedure eJournal
Richard Friedman (1991)
Character Impeachment Evidence: Psycho-Bayesian (!?) Analysis and a Proposed Overhaul
Richard Friedman (1995)
Refining Conditional Probative Value
C. Sanchirico (2001)
Character Evidence and the Object of TrialColumbia Law Review, 101
Richard Overstall (1999)
Mystic Infallibility: Using Probability Theorems to Sift DNA Evidence, 5
G. Wells, Elizabeth Olson (2002)
Eyewitness identification: information gain from incriminating and exonerating behaviors.Journal of experimental psychology. Applied, 8 3
D. L. Faigman, A. J. Baglioni (1988)
Bayes' theorem in the trial process: Instructing jurors on the value of statistical evidenceLaw and Human Behavior, 12
I. Weiner, A. Hess (2005)
Handbook of forensic psychology.
B. Smith, Steven Penrod, Amy Otto, R. Park (1996)
Jurors' use of probabilistic evidenceLaw and Human Behavior, 20
R. T. Reagan (2000)
Supreme court decisions and probability theory: Getting the analysis rightUniversity of Detroit Mercy Law Review, 77
G. Melton, J. Petrila, N. Poythress, C. Slobogin (1997)
Psychological Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers
David Faigman, A. Baglioni (1988)
Bayes' theorem in the trial processLaw and Human Behavior, 12
E. Jonas, S. Schulz-Hardt, D. Frey, Norman Thelen (2001)
Confirmation bias in sequential information search after preliminary decisions: an expansion of dissonance theoretical research on selective exposure to information.Journal of personality and social psychology, 80 4
T. Litwack, L. Schlesinger (1999)
Dangerousness risk assessments: Research, legal, and clinical considerations.
Richard Friedman (1995)
Reply: Refining Conditional Probative ValueMichigan Law Review, 94
Richard Friedman, R. Park (2003)
Sometimes What Everybody Thinks They Know Is TrueLaw and Human Behavior, 27
D. Kaye (1993)
DNA Evidence: Probability, Population Genetics, and the CourtsHarvard Journal of Law & Technology, 7
J. Armour (1994)
Race Ipsa Loquitur: Of Reasonable Racists, Intelligent Bayesians, and Involuntary NegrophobesStanford Law Review, 46
(1980)
The Myth of Conditional Relevancy
H. Hall (1999)
Lethal violence : a sourcebook on fatal domestic, acquaintance, and stranger violence
Richard Friedman (2000)
A Presumption of Innocence, Not of Even OddsStanford Law Review, 52
D. H. Kaye (1987)
The polygraph and the PVPStatistical Science, 2
J. J. Koehler, A. Chia, J. S. Lindsey (1995)
The random match probability in DNA evidence: Irrelevant and prejudicial?Jurimetrics Journal, 35
D. Davis, W. Follette (2002)
Rethinking the Probative Value of Evidence: Base Rates, Intuitive Profiling, and the “Postdiction” of BehaviorLaw and Human Behavior, 26
M. MacCrimmon, P. Tillers (2002)
The Dynamics of Judicial Proof: Computation, Logic, and Common Sense
J. Koehler (1996)
On Conveying the Probative Value of DNA Evidence: Frequencies, Likelihood Ratios and Error RatesInnovation Law & Policy eJournal
Richard Lempert (2001)
The Economic Analysis of Evidence Law: Common Sense on StiltsVirginia Law Review, 87
J. J. Koehler (1996)
Proving the case: The science of DNA. On conveying the probative value of DNA evidence: Frequencies, likelihood ratios, and error ratesColorado Law Review, 67
David Kaye, J. Koehler (2003)
The Misquantification of Probative ValueLaw and Human Behavior, 27
M. Saks, R. Kidd (1980)
Human Information Processing and Adjudication: Trial by HeuristicsLaw & Society Review, 15
P. Tillers (1994)
Response: Exaggerated and Misleading Reports of the Death of Conditional RelevanceMichigan Law Review, 93
R. Park (1998)
Character at the CrossroadsHastings Law Journal, 49
Neil Websdale (1999)
Understanding Domestic Homicide
Dale Nance (1990)
Conditional Relevance Reinterpreted
R. Lempert (1977)
Modeling relevanceMichigan Law Review, 75
R. J. Ofshe, R. A. Leo (1997)
The decision to confess falsely: Rational choice and irrational actionDenver University Law Review, 74
Gerd Gigerenzer (2000)
Adaptive Thinking: Rationality in the Real World
Dale Nance (1995)
Conditional Probative Value and the Reconstruction of the Federal Rules of EvidenceMichigan Law Review, 94
D. D. Koski (2001)
Jury decisionmaking in rape trials: A review and empirical assessmentCriminal Law Bulletin, 38
E. Morgan (1929)
Functions of Judge and Jury in the Determination of Preliminary Questions of FactHarvard Law Review, 43
P. Garbolino (2001)
Explaining relevanceCardozo Law Review, 22
A. Scolnicov (2000)
On the Relevance of “Relevance” to the Theory of Legal FactfindingIsrael Law Review, 34
D. H. Kaye (1986)
Quantifying probative valueBoston University Law Review, 66
Scott Decker (1979)
Law and Society ReviewJournal of Drug Issues, 9
R. D. Friedman (1986)
A close look at probative valueBoston University Law Review, 66
D. Kahneman, A. Tversky (1972)
Subjective Probability: A Judgment of RepresentativenessCognitive Psychology, 3
R. C. Park (1996)
Proving the case: Character and prior acts. Character evidence issues in the O. J. Simpson caseColorado Law Review, 67
D. Kaye (1995)
The Relevance of Matching DNA: Is the Window Half Open Or Half ShutJournal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 85
D. Kaye (1985)
Quantifying Probative ValueEvidence & Evidentiary Procedure eJournal
P. Tillers (1994)
Exaggerated and misleading reports of the death of conditional relevanceMichigan Law Review, 93
J. Koehler (2001)
The Psychology of Numbers in the Courtroom: How to Make DNA Match Statistics Seem Impressive or Insufficient
G. Wells (1992)
Naked Statistical Evidence of Liability: Is Subjective Probability Enough?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62
John Copeland, M. Snyder (1995)
When Counselors Confirm: A Functional AnalysisPersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21
C. R. Callen (1996)
Proving the case: Character and prior actsColorado Law Review, 67
N. Pennington, R. Hastie (1993)
Inside the juror: The psychology of juror decision making
D. Turk, P. Salovey (1988)
Reasoning, Inference, and Judgement in Clinical Psychology
H. C. Sox, M. A. Blatt, M. C. Higgins, K. I. Marton (1988)
Medical decision making
J. Koehler, T. Lyon (1996)
The Relevance Ratio: Evaluating the Probative Value of Expert Testimony in Child Sexual Abuse CasesFamily & Children's Law eJournal
D. Kaye (1987)
[The Statistical Precision of Medical Screening Procedures: Application to Polygraph and AIDS Antibodies Test Data]: Comment: The Polygraph and the PVPStatistical Science, 2
Charles Nesson (1985)
The Evidence or the Event? On Judicial Proof and the Acceptability of VerdictsHarvard Law Review, 98
R. Park (1996)
Character Evidence Issues in the O.J. Simpson Case–Or, Rationales of the Character Evidence Ban, With Illustrations from the Simpson CaseUniversity of Colorado Law Review, 67
S. Vanous (2002)
Prejudicial nature of motive evidence
D. Crump (1997)
On the uses of irrelevant evidenceHouston Law Review, 34
G. Wells (2003)
Murder, Extramarital Affairs, and the Issue of Probative ValueLaw and Human Behavior, 27
R. Hastie (1993)
Inside the juror: Models of juror decision making
Tung Yin (2000)
The Probative Values and Pitfalls of Drug Courier Profiles as Probabilistic Evidence, 5
R. D. Friedman (1997)
Irrelevance, minimal relevance, and meta-relevanceHouston Law Review, 34
This paper responds to criticisms/misconstruals of our measure of the maximum probative value of evidence (D. Davis & W. C. Follette, 2002), and our conclusions regarding the potentially prejudicial role of “intuitive profiling” evidence, including motive. We argue that R. D. Friedman and R. C. Park’s (2003) criticisms and example cases are largely based on inappropriate violation of the presumption of innocence. Further, we address the merits of our absolute difference measure of probative value versus those of the Bayesian likelihood ratio championed by D. H. Kaye and J. J. Koehler (2003). We recommend methods for presentation of measures of evidence utility that convey complexities of interdependence between new and existing evidence. Finally, we propose a “probable cause” standard for admission of potentially prejudicial evidence, dictating that admissibility of such evidence should be contingent upon other substantial evidence of guilt.
Law and Human Behavior – American Psychological Association
Published: Dec 1, 2003
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.