反思法庭上的科学交流:可信度问题

Anna L. Heavey , Max M. Houck
{"title":"反思法庭上的科学交流:可信度问题","authors":"Anna L. Heavey ,&nbsp;Max M. Houck","doi":"10.1016/j.fsisyn.2024.100483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The high value placed on forensic information in the criminal justice process is demonstrated by the fallout resulting when questions are raised as to the validity of methods used, deficiencies in the understanding of the limitations of results, or uncertainties around the professional expertise or ethical practices of the provider of the information. To effectively act as the “speaker” for the scientific evidence in court, forensic science needs to have credibility. The workshop “Rethinking scientific communication in courts” held at the Australian National University College of Law in November 2023 explored the subject of science communication in the legal context through the lens of philosophy, law, forensic service provision and meta-science, demonstrating the unique challenges placed on the field of forensic science as a scientific profession confined and defined within a non-scientific system. Stemming from the discussions at the workshop, this paper examines the notion of credibility in science, how forensic science aligns with the hallmarks of a credible scientific community and the influence this has on our understandings of scientific communication in courts.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36925,"journal":{"name":"Forensic Science International: Synergy","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100483"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589871X24000305/pdfft?md5=eef4af45476f648582889923d4279af2&pid=1-s2.0-S2589871X24000305-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rethinking scientific communication in courts: A question of credibility\",\"authors\":\"Anna L. Heavey ,&nbsp;Max M. Houck\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.fsisyn.2024.100483\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The high value placed on forensic information in the criminal justice process is demonstrated by the fallout resulting when questions are raised as to the validity of methods used, deficiencies in the understanding of the limitations of results, or uncertainties around the professional expertise or ethical practices of the provider of the information. To effectively act as the “speaker” for the scientific evidence in court, forensic science needs to have credibility. The workshop “Rethinking scientific communication in courts” held at the Australian National University College of Law in November 2023 explored the subject of science communication in the legal context through the lens of philosophy, law, forensic service provision and meta-science, demonstrating the unique challenges placed on the field of forensic science as a scientific profession confined and defined within a non-scientific system. Stemming from the discussions at the workshop, this paper examines the notion of credibility in science, how forensic science aligns with the hallmarks of a credible scientific community and the influence this has on our understandings of scientific communication in courts.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36925,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Forensic Science International: Synergy\",\"volume\":\"9 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100483\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589871X24000305/pdfft?md5=eef4af45476f648582889923d4279af2&pid=1-s2.0-S2589871X24000305-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Forensic Science International: Synergy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589871X24000305\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forensic Science International: Synergy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589871X24000305","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在刑事司法程序中,对法医信息的高度重视体现在对所使用方法的有效性提出质疑、对结果的局限性认识不足或对信息提供者的专业知识或道德实践存在不确定性时所产生的后果上。要在法庭上有效地充当科学证据的 "发言人",法医学必须具有可信度。2023年11月,在澳大利亚国立大学法学院举办的 "反思法庭上的科学交流 "研讨会通过哲学、法律、法医服务提供和元科学的视角,探讨了法律背景下的科学交流主题,展示了法医学领域作为一个被限制和界定在非科学体系中的科学专业所面临的独特挑战。本文以研讨会的讨论为基础,探讨了科学可信性的概念、法医学如何与可信的科学界的标志相一致,以及这对我们理解法庭科学交流的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Rethinking scientific communication in courts: A question of credibility

The high value placed on forensic information in the criminal justice process is demonstrated by the fallout resulting when questions are raised as to the validity of methods used, deficiencies in the understanding of the limitations of results, or uncertainties around the professional expertise or ethical practices of the provider of the information. To effectively act as the “speaker” for the scientific evidence in court, forensic science needs to have credibility. The workshop “Rethinking scientific communication in courts” held at the Australian National University College of Law in November 2023 explored the subject of science communication in the legal context through the lens of philosophy, law, forensic service provision and meta-science, demonstrating the unique challenges placed on the field of forensic science as a scientific profession confined and defined within a non-scientific system. Stemming from the discussions at the workshop, this paper examines the notion of credibility in science, how forensic science aligns with the hallmarks of a credible scientific community and the influence this has on our understandings of scientific communication in courts.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
75
审稿时长
90 days
期刊最新文献
A transdisciplinary integrated approach to improve identification outcomes for decomposed decedents in medicolegal death investigations Manner of death prediction: A machine learning approach to classify suicide and non-suicide using blood metabolomics Digitalisation of forensic expert activity in Ukraine: Organisational and legal framework Impact of harassment and bullying of forensic scientists on work performance, absenteeism, and intention to leave the workplace in the United States Barriers to human remains identification using forensic odontology in resource-constrained settings
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1