[Epistemological Misunderstandings of the German Federal Court of Justice in Criminal Cases Regarding the Null Hypothesis: Verification in the Credibility Assessment].

IF 0.8 4区医学 Q4 PSYCHIATRY Zeitschrift Fur Kinder-Und Jugendpsychiatrie Und Psychotherapie Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-16 DOI:10.1024/1422-4917/a000995

Jörg M Fegert, Cedric Sachser, Martin Pusch, Andrea Kliemann, Jelena Gerke

{"title":"[Epistemological Misunderstandings of the German Federal Court of Justice in Criminal Cases Regarding the Null Hypothesis: Verification in the Credibility Assessment].","authors":"Jörg M Fegert, Cedric Sachser, Martin Pusch, Andrea Kliemann, Jelena Gerke","doi":"10.1024/1422-4917/a000995","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Epistemological Misunderstandings of the German Federal Court of Justice in Criminal Cases Regarding the Null Hypothesis: Verification in the Credibility Assessment Abstract: Background: The article deals with the decision of the German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof, BGH) in criminal matters regarding credibility assessment dated 30 July 1999 (1 StR 618/98, BGHSt 45, 164). Regarding criminal matters, the BGH formulated specific requirements for credibility assessments based on two published scientific expert reports. Method: We analyzed conflicting postulates of scientific theory in the expert reports and the reception of these principles in the BGH judgment by examining the original quotes. Results: Given the central importance of this BGH decision, we analyzed the original expert reports for their epistemological content. The BGH formulated the scientific approach of starting from the assumption that the statement is untrue - the so-called \"null hypothesis\". In doing so, it referred to Popper's deductivism, albeit without addressing the rules of hypothesis testing. Based on the second expert report, which argues for inductive.","PeriodicalId":54189,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift Fur Kinder-Und Jugendpsychiatrie Und Psychotherapie","volume":" ","pages":"342-352"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift Fur Kinder-Und Jugendpsychiatrie Und Psychotherapie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1024/1422-4917/a000995","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Epistemological Misunderstandings of the German Federal Court of Justice in Criminal Cases Regarding the Null Hypothesis: Verification in the Credibility Assessment Abstract: Background: The article deals with the decision of the German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof, BGH) in criminal matters regarding credibility assessment dated 30 July 1999 (1 StR 618/98, BGHSt 45, 164). Regarding criminal matters, the BGH formulated specific requirements for credibility assessments based on two published scientific expert reports. Method: We analyzed conflicting postulates of scientific theory in the expert reports and the reception of these principles in the BGH judgment by examining the original quotes. Results: Given the central importance of this BGH decision, we analyzed the original expert reports for their epistemological content. The BGH formulated the scientific approach of starting from the assumption that the statement is untrue - the so-called "null hypothesis". In doing so, it referred to Popper's deductivism, albeit without addressing the rules of hypothesis testing. Based on the second expert report, which argues for inductive.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

[德国联邦法院在刑事案件中关于零假设的认识论误区：可信度评估中的验证]。

德国联邦法院在刑事案件中关于零假设的认识论误区：可信度评估中的验证摘要：背景：本文涉及德国联邦法院（Bundesgerichtshof, BGH）1999 年 7 月 30 日关于刑事案件可信度评估的裁决（1 StR 618/98, BGHSt 45, 164）。关于刑事事项，联邦法院根据两份已公布的科学专家报告，制定了可信度评估的具体要求。方法：我们分析了专家报告中相互冲突的科学理论假设，并通过研究原始引文分析了这些原则在联邦法院判决中的接受情况。结果：鉴于联邦卫生法院判决的重要性，我们分析了原始专家报告中的认识论内容。联邦高等法院制定了一种科学方法，即从假设陈述不真实--即所谓的 "零假设"--出发。在这样做的时候，它提到了波普尔的演绎法，尽管没有涉及假设检验的规则。第二份专家报告主张归纳法。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Zeitschrift Fur Kinder-Und Jugendpsychiatrie Und Psychotherapie PSYCHIATRY-

CiteScore

1.90

自引率

16.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： Die Zeitschrift veröffentlicht Originalarbeiten, Übersichtsreferate, Fallberichte, aktuelle Mitteilungen und Buchbesprechungen und informiert laufend über die Arbeit anderer internationaler Fachzeitschriften. Sie ist offizielles Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Kinder- und Jugendpsychiatrie, Psychosomatik und Psychotherapie.