Evidence, probability and relative plausibility
- PMID: 36110308
- PMCID: PMC9465537
- DOI: 10.1177/13657127221114508
Evidence, probability and relative plausibility
Abstract
A comparison is made between probability and relative plausibility as approaches for the interpretation of evidence. It is argued that a probabilistic approach is capable of answering the criticisms of the proponents of relative plausibility. It is also shown that a probabilistic approach can answer the problem of overlapping where there is evidence that each side claims supports its theory of what happened.
Keywords: conjunction; interpretation; likelihood ratio; overlapping problem; relative plausibility.
© The Author(s) 2022.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of conflicting interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
References
-
- Aitken CGG. (1995) Statistics and the Evaluation of Evidence for Forensic Scientists. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
-
- Aitken CGG, Connolly T, Gammerman A, et al. (1996) Statistical modelling in specific case analysis. Science and Justice 36(4): 245–255. - PubMed
-
- Aitken CGG, Taroni F, Bozza S. (2021) Statistics and the Evaluation of Evidence for Forensic Scientists, 3rd ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
-
- Allen RJ. (2013) Taming complexity: Rationality, the law of evidence and the nature of the legal system. Law, Probability and Risk 12(2): 99–113.
-
- Allen RJ, Pardo MS. (2019) Relative plausibility and its critics. International Journal of Evidence and Proof 23(1–2): 5–59.
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources