Bias Are About The Normative Standard Video
CRITICAL THINKING - Fundamentals: Normative and Descriptive Claims [HD] Bias Are About The Normative StandardSkip to search form Skip to main content You are currently offline.
Main navigation
Some features of the site may not work correctly. DOI: The merits of using subjective probability theory as a normative standard for evidence evaluation by legal fact-finders have been hotly source for decades.
Critics argue that formal mathematical models only lead to an apparent precision that obfuscates the ad-hoc nature of the many assumptions that underlie the model. View via Publisher. Save to Library.
Create Alert. Launch Research Feed. Share This Paper.
Topics from this paper. Are humans good intuitive statisticians after all? Rethinking some conclusions from the literature on judgment under uncertainty. Research Feed.
Navigation menu
Can We Trust Intuitive Jurors? Comparing Holistic and Atomistic Evaluation of Evidence.
Resolving the so-called "probabilistic paradoxes in legal reasoning" with Bayesian networks. Modeling and predicting emerging inference-based decisions in complex and ambiguous legal settings. Bayes and the Law. Avoiding probabilistic reasoning fallacies in legal practice using Bayesian networks.
The complete guide to survey questions with examples, types, and tips to write great questions.
Related Papers. Abstract Topics 68 References Related Papers. By clicking accept or continuing to use the site, you agree to the terms outlined in our Privacy PolicyTerms of Serviceand Dataset License.]
One thought on “Bias Are About The Normative Standard”