Legal idioms: A framework for evidential reasoning

Argument and Computation

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 46-63

  Lagnado, David A ^a   Fenton, Norman ^b   Neil, Martin ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

alibi evidence; Bayesian networks; evidential reasoning; legal argument

Indexed keywords

ALIBI EVIDENCE; COMPLEX BODIES; EMPIRICAL STUDIES; EVIDENTIAL REASONING; LEGAL ARGUMENTS; LEGAL CASE; LEGAL CONTEXTS; MODEL COMPLEXES; QUALITATIVE ASPECTS;

BAYESIAN NETWORKS;

EID: 84874081364     PISSN: 19462166     EISSN: 19462174     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/19462166.2012.682656     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Bovens, L., and Hartmann, S. (2003), Bayesian Epistemology, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2. Corner, A., Hahn, U., and Oaksford, M. (2011), 'The Psychological Mechanism of the Slippery Slope Argument', Journal of Memory and Language, 64, 133-152.
3. Crown Court Benchbook (2010), http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/publications- and-reports/judicial-college/Judicial College: Judicial Studies Board.
4. Dawid, A.P., and Evett, I.W. (1997), 'Using a Graphical Model to Assist the Evaluation of Complicated Patterns of Evidence', Journal of Forensic Sciences, 42, 226-231.
5. Dennis, I. (2007), The Law of Evidence. London, Thomson Sweet & Maxwell, 3rd Edition.
6. Dror, I.E., and Charlton, D. (2006), 'Why Experts Make Errors', Journal of Forensic Identification, 56(4), 600-616. (Pubitemid 43955743)
7. Druzdzel, M. (1996), 'Qualitative Verbal Explanations in Bayesian Belief Networks', Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behaviour Quarterly, 94, 43-54.
8. Edwards,W. (1991), 'Influence Diagrams, Bayesian Imperialism, and the Collins Case:AnAppeal to Reason', Cardozo Law Review, 13, 1025-1079.
9. Fenton, N., and Neil, M. (2011), 'Avoiding Legal Fallacies in Practice Using Bayesian Networks', Australian Journal of Legal Philosophy. 36, 114-150.
10. Fenton, N., Neil, M., and Lagnado, D.A. (2012), 'A General Structure for Legal Arguments about Evidence using Bayesian Networks', Cognitive Science, in press.
11. Friedman, D. (1987), 'Route Analysis of Credibility and Hearsay', Yale Law Journal, 96(4), 667-742.
12. Gooderson, R.N. (1977), Alibi, London: Heinemann Educational.
13. Griffiths, T.L., Kemp, C., and Tenenbaum, J.B. (2008), 'Bayesian Models of Cognition', in The Cambridge Handbook of Computational Cognitive Modelling, ed. R. Sun, NewYork, Cambridge University Press.
14. Hahn, U., and Oaksford, M. (2007), 'The Rationality of Informal Argumentation: A Bayesian Approach to Reasoning Fallacies', Psychological Review, 114, 704-732.
15. Hahn, U., Oaksford, M., and Harris, A. (2012). Rational Argument, Rational Inference. Argument and Computation. In press.
16. Harris, A.J.L., and Hahn, U. (2009), 'Bayesian Rationality in Evaluating Multiple Testimonies: Incorporating the Role of Coherence', Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 1366-1372.
17. Hepler, A.B., Dawid, A.P., and Leucari, V. (2007), 'Object-Oriented Graphical Representations of Complex Patterns of Evidence', Law, Probability & Risk, 6, 275-293.
18. Jarvstad, A., and Hahn, U. (2011), 'Source Reliability and the Conjunction Fallacy', Cognitive Science, 35, 682-711.
19. Kadane, J.B., and Schum, D.A. (1996), A Probabilistic Analysis of the Sacco and Vanzetti Evidence, New York, JohnWiley.
20. Keppens, J. (2007), 'Towards Qualitative Approaches to Bayesian Evidential Reasoning', in Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pp. 17-25. (Pubitemid 47281655)
21. Krynski, T.R., and Tenenbaum, J.B. (2007), 'The Role of Causality in Judgment under Uncertainty', Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 430-450.
22. Lagnado, D.A. (2011), 'Thinking about Evidence', in Evidence, Inference and Enquiry, eds. P. Dawid, W. Twining, and M.Vasilaki, Proceedings of the BritishAcademy, 171, 183-224. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
23. Lagnado, D.A. (2012), 'Adverse Inferences about Alibi Evidence', Manuscript under preparation.
24. Lagnado, D.A., and Harvey, N. (2008), 'The Impact of Discredited Evidence', Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 1166-1173.
25. Neil, M., Fenton, N., and Nielsen, L. (2000), 'Building Large-Scale Bayesian Networks', Knowledge Engineering Review, 15, 257-284. (Pubitemid 32159155)
26. Oaksford, M., and Chater,N. (2007), Bayesian Rationality: The Probabilistic Approach to Human Reasoning, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27. Oaksford, M., and Chater,N. (2010), Cognition and Conditionals: Probability and Logic in Human Thinking, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
28. Parsons, S. (2001), Qualitative Methods for Reasoning under Uncertainty, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29. Pearl, J. (1988), Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems, Palo Alto, CA: Morgan Kaufmann
30. Pennington, N., and Hastie, R. (1986), 'Evidence Evaluation in Complex Decision Making', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 242-258.
31. Pennington, N., and Hastie, R. (1992), 'Explaining the Evidence: Test of the Story Model for Juror Decision Making', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 189-206.
32. Pourret, O., Naim, P., and Marcot, B. (2008), Bayesian Networks: A Practical Guide to Applications, Chichester:Wiley.
33. Robertson, B., andVignaux, T. (1995), Interpreting Evidence: Evaluating Forensic Science in the Courtroom, NewYork: JohnWiley.
34. R. v Pemberton (1994), 99 Cr. App. R. 228. CA.
35. Schum, D.A. (1994), The Evidential Foundations of Probabilistic Reasoning, Northwestern University Press.
36. Taroni, F., Aitken, C., Garbolino, P., and Biedermann, A. (2006), Bayesian Networks and Probabilistic Inference in Forensic Science, Chichester: JohnWiley.
37. Tillers, P., and Green, E. (1988), Probability and Inference in the Law of Evidence: The Uses and Limits of Bayesianism, Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
38. Walton, D. (2008),Witness Testimony Evidence: Argumentation, Artificial Intelligence, and Law, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.