On lay testimony
Ragion Pratica, ISSN: 1720-2396, Vol: 2016, Issue: 2, Page: 279-298
2016
- 1Citations
- 2Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Contemporary epistemology credits testimony with a high value as a source of knowledge, while psychology stresses the biases and errors of lay testimony. The paper addresses this paradoxical situation with respect to lay testimony in legal trials and concludes that a principle of distrust (as opposed to a principle of credulity) governs such evidence in such contexts (or at least in the Italian one as framed by the civil and criminal procedure codes). The reason for this kind of distrust can be found in the interests at stake in such non-ordinary contexts as trials.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know