The Misquantification of Probative Value

D. Davis and W. C. Follette (2002) purport to show that when "the base rate" for a crime is low, the probative value of "characteristics known to be strongly associated with the crime ... will be virtually nil." Their analysis rests on the choice of an arbitrary and inopposite measure of the probative value of evidence. When a more suitable metric is used (e.g., a likelihood ratio), it becomes clear that evidence they would dismiss as devoid of probative value is relevant and diagnostic.     

Sometimes What Everybody Thinks They Know Is True

This essay responds to D. Davis and W. C. Follette (2002), who question the value of motive evidence in murder cases. They argue that the evidence that a husband had extramarital affairs, that he heavily insured his wife's life, or that he battered his wife is ordinarily of infinitesimal probative value. We disagree. To be sure, it would be foolish to predict solely on the basis of such evidence that a husband will murder his wife. However, when this kind of evidence is combined with other evidence in a realistic murder case, the evidence can be quite probative. We analyze cases in which it is virtually certain that the victim was murdered but unclear who murdered her, and in which it is uncertain whether the husband murdered the wife or she died by accident. We show that in each case motive evidence, such as a history of battering or of infidelity, can substantially increase the odds of the husband's guilt. We also consider the actual case on which Davis and Follette base their paper. We argue that testimony of Davis on the basis of the analysis presented in their paper was properly excluded, for it would have been misleading and unhelpful.     

Equity,relative deprivation,and the value consensus paradox

This paper addresses the question of why respondents, when asked to specify an income they would be willing to accept as just, settle for an amount that, in most case, does not deviate strongly from what they actually receive. The phenomenon is illustrated by data from West Germany. It is argued that relative deprivation theory must be extended to incorporate processes of social hierarchy perception because inasmuch as this perception is contorted it creates illusory justice evaluations. Empirical evidence of misperceiving social distributions is given by social grading studies based on large German samples. The structural causes of the distributional misperceptions are discussed, one of these causes being the value consensus paradox, i.e., the paradox that, in a stratified society, value consensus will produce different social perceptions.     

Book Review Department

Book Reviewed in this Article.
ADVERSE POSSESS ION By Charles C. Callahan
Society and the Law (New Meanings for an Old Profession). By F. James Davis, Henry H. Foster, Jr., C. Ray Jeffery, and E. Eugene Davis.
The Pyramid Climbers By Vance Packard
Conceptual Foundations of Business By Richard Eells and Clarence Walton Homewood, Illinois Richard D. Irwin
Principles of Business Law By Dillavou, Howard, Roberts, Robert and Corley Englewood Cliffs     

Setting the Record Straight: Comment on Gurley,Piechowski, Sheehan,and Gray (2014) on the Admissibility of the Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS) in Court

Gurley et al. (Psychological Injury and Law 7:9–17, 2014) express reservations about the admissibility of testimony based on the Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS) in court. They question whether there is sufficient evidentiary foundation in the underlying psychometrics and adequate general acceptance among psychologists for R-PAS-based testimony to meet either the Daubert or Frye criteria for admissibility and also raise doubts about how well it meets the criteria for the use of forensic tests proposed by Heilbrun (Law and Human Behavior 16:257–272, 1992). This invited comment addresses their concerns about the admissibility of R-PAS-based testimony and corrects some erroneous statements about the psychometrics of R-PAS and the pertinent empirical literature. Gurley et al. characterize R-PAS as being in competition with the established Comprehensive System (CS; Exner 2003), though we clarify that it is actually an evolutionary development from the CS and designed to be a replacement for it. We also point out how their conclusion that R-PAS-based forensic testimony may be hazardous or premature is based on an insufficient familiarity with the R-PAS scientific and professional literature, a misinterpretation of the Frye and Daubert evidentiary standards, and a mischaracterization of several of Heilbrun’s (Law and Human Behavior 16:257–272, 1992) criteria for the use of tests in forensic testimony.     

Some further evidence on imprisonment vs. the death penalty as a deterrent to murder

Law and Human Behavior - The research reported here extends an earlier investigation (Bailey, 1977) on the deterrent effect of imprisonment versus the death penalty for murder. As a result of some...     

The Empirical Limits of Forensic Mental Health Assessment

This article introduces a special issue of Law and Human Behavior, including five articles describing the limits of forensic mental health assessments of (a) risk of violence in female adolescents, (b) sexually violent predators, (c) dangerousness in capital murder cases, (d) child sexual abuse, and (e) PTSD litigants. Knowing the limits of forensic mental health assessment methods is essential in order to recognize their strengths, increase the credibility of forensic mental health assessment, and drive research that will enhance the value of assessments for the courts.     

Victim Blame in Fictional Crime Dramas: An Examination of Demographic,Incident-Related,and Behavioral Factors

How victims are portrayed in fictional crime dramas is an important way that individuals come to understand and interpret what it means to be a victim of crime. We examine how demographic variables (e.g., gender, race, age), incident variables (e.g., location of offense, relationship between victim and offender, type of crime), and behavioral variables (e.g., drug use/alcohol use, sexual promiscuity, negative personality traits, or concealing elements of personality) predict victim blame. Although some literature has analyzed victims in fictional crime dramas, such literature has been limited to a single year, a single show, a particular crime, or a particular factor. We extend this literature by focusing on multiple factors that predict victim blame using data collected from a systematic sample of 124 episodes from 4 fictional crime dramas (CSI, Law & Order: Special Victims Unit, Criminal Minds, and Without a Trace) over 7 years (2003–2010).     

Legal vs. quantified definitions of standards of proof

Law and Human Behavior - Three laboratory experiments were conducted to compare legal (unquantified) definitions of three standards of proof (“preponderance of the evidence,”...     

Deception Detection Expertise

A lively debate between Bond and Uysal (2007, Law and Human Behavior, 31, 109-115) and O'Sullivan (2007, Law and Human Behavior, 31, 117-123) concerns whether there are experts in deception detection. Two experiments sought to (a) identify expert(s) in detection and assess them twice with four tests, and (b) study their detection behavior using eye tracking. Paroled felons produced videotaped statements that were presented to students and law enforcement personnel. Two experts were identified, both female Native American BIA correctional officers. Experts were over 80% accurate in the first assessment, and scored at 90% accuracy in the second assessment. In Signal Detection analyses, experts showed high discrimination, and did not evidence biased responding. They exploited nonverbal cues to make fast, accurate decisions. These highly-accurate individuals can be characterized as experts in deception detection.     

The Admissibility of the R-PAS in Court

The admissibility of the Rorschach has been a concern of forensic psychologists for many years. The focus of this debate has been the Comprehensive System, which is the most researched of the current Rorschach Systems available in the USA. However, recently, a new, competing system has been published: the Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS; Meyer et al., Rorschach Performance Assessment System: Administration, Coding, Interpretation, and Technical Manual, 2011). Using Heilbrun’s (Law and Human Behavior 16:257–272, 1992) guidelines as a framework, we examine the admissibility of this new system according to the standards outlined in Daubert (1993) and Frye (1923). We conclude that we have reservations about the admissibility of the R-PAS in court at the present time, notwithstanding ongoing work on this system.     

Validation of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory for Axis II Disorders: Does It Meet the Daubert Standard?

Law and Human Behavior - Relevant to forensic practice, the Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993) established the boundaries for the admissibility of scientific...     

Community Perceptions of Allowable Counterforce in Self-Defense and Defense of Property

Law and Human Behavior - What level of force do people believe is appropriate to use in self-defense and defense of property? One answer is that a person may use only the bare minimum of force...     

Explaining Sexual Harassment Judgments: Looking Beyond Gender of the Rater

Law and Human Behavior - In two decades of research on sexual harassment, one finding that appears repeatedly is that gender of the rater influences judgments about sexual harassment such that...     

Competence to Stand Trial: A Neuropsychological Inquiry

Law and Human Behavior - How might the deconstruction of the legal theory of competence be related to modern neuropsychological models of cognition? To address this question, we examined...     

论法学的科学性问题

法学的实践性实际上是与法学的科学性联系在一起的.在历史上,有学者(比如冯·基尔希曼)认为,法学作为"科学"从理论上说是无价值的,它并非"科学".应当看到,法学是一门以"问题-决定"为中心、以某个特定的在历史上形成的实在法秩序为基础、采取诠释-评价的论证方式来探求法律问题之答案(解决法律问题)的(实践)规范性诠释科学,它...     

Causal theories of crime and their effect upon expert parole decisions

Law and Human Behavior - Criminal justice experts and laypeople seek to understand the causes of criminal behavior in order to promote social programs and individualized treatments that can reduce...     

“罪名“与“犯罪行为“之辨——对刑法第十七条第二款的解读

理论上和实务中对刑法第十七条第二款的规定有不同的理解,有人认为是八种具体犯罪的罪名,有人认为是八种犯罪行为。但是从文义解释、刑法第十七条第二款的立法精神和规范目的、“犯罪行为说”的弊端以及“罪名说”能满足实践需要四个方面能够证明:“罪名说”的观点是正确的。应该站在成文刑法的特点和罪刑法定原则的立场上去理解现实上存在的值得科处刑罚却不能解释到刑法第十七条第二款中去的行为。     

Whither Trial Consulting? Issues and Projections

Law and Human Behavior - Trial consulting is fast becoming de rigeur in major litigation. This article first reviews the growth of the field and its most common applications. Coinciding with the...     

Toward an Empirical Approach to Evidentiary Ruling

This paper responds to criticisms/misconstruals of our measure of the maximum probative value of evidence (D. Davis & W. C. Follette, 2002), and our conclusions regarding the potentially prejudicial role of intuitive profiling evidence, including motive. We argue that R. D. Friedman and R. C. Park's (2003) criticisms and example cases are largely based on inappropriate violation of the presumption of innocence. Further, we address the merits of our absolute difference measure of probative value versus those of the Bayesian likelihood ratio championed by D. H. Kaye and J. J. Koehler (2003). We recommend methods for presentation of measures of evidence utility that convey complexities of interdependence between new and existing evidence. Finally, we propose a probable cause standard for admission of potentially prejudicial evidence, dictating that admissibility of such evidence should be contingent upon other substantial evidence of guilt.