Can Jurors Recognize Missing Control Groups,Confounds, and Experimenter Bias in Psychological Science?

This study examined the ability of jury-eligible community members (N = 248) to detect internal validity threats in psychological science presented during a trial. Participants read a case summary in which an expert testified about a study that varied in internal validity (valid, missing control group, confound, and experimenter bias) and ecological validity (high, low). Ratings of expert evidence quality and expert credibility were higher for the valid versus missing control group versions only. Internal validity did not influence verdict or ratings of plaintiff credibility and no differences emerged as a function of ecological validity. Expert evidence quality, expert credibility, and plaintiff credibility were positively correlated with verdict. Implications for the scientific reasoning literature and for trials containing psychological science are discussed.     

医疗纠纷司法鉴定40例分析

目的分析医疗纠纷产生的主要原因和医疗过失行为的主要表现形式,并探讨医疗纠纷司法鉴定中应注意的主要问题。方法对2006—2008年本所鉴定的40例医疗纠纷案件进行回顾性分析。结果在40例医疗纠纷案件中,来自市级、县级、乡镇医院及个体诊所的分别为11例（27.5%）、24例（60.0%）、2例（5.0%）和3例（7.5%）;来自内科、外科、妇产科、儿科和门/急诊的分别16例（40.0%）、10例（25.0%）、9例（22.5%）、2例（5.0%）和3例（7.5%）;来自县级以上医院的医疗纠纷被认定存在医疗过失行为的比例低于乡镇医院及个体诊所。结论市、县级医院医疗纠纷较乡镇医院及个体诊所多见,但被认定有医疗过失的要少于乡镇医院及个体诊所。     

The indirectly generated tainted truth effect: warning is not necessary to worsen the testimony of non-misled persons

The purpose of the present research was to examine the indirectly generated tainted truth effect (TTE). The TTE refers to decreased accuracy on a memory test among persons who are erroneously warned about non-existent misinformation in material that describes an event. It was expected that the TTE would occur even without an explicit warning about misinformation, if one distinctive item of misinformation appeared in postevent material that also contained correct information that was consistent with the original material about the event (indirectly generated TTE: IGTTE). Experiment 1 produced the IGTTE and this effect was replicated in Experiment 2. Experiment 2 showed that the classic and indirect versions of the TTE usually occurred among persons who incorrectly monitored the source of information. Experiment 3 replicated the IGTTE using a procedure that included an additional phase between presenting the original and postevent material – initial testing. When the initial testing procedure was administered in Experiment 3, the TTE was smaller; however, this initial testing procedure had no effect on the IGTTE.     

Judging guilt and accuracy: highly confident eyewitnesses are discounted when they provide featural justifications

Jurors are heavily swayed by confident eyewitnesses. Are they also influenced by how eyewitnesses justify their level of confidence? Here we document a counter-intuitive effect: when eyewitnesses identified a suspect from a lineup with absolute certainty (‘I am completely confident’) and justified their confidence by referring to a visible feature of the accused (‘I remember his nose’), participants judged the suspect as less likely to be guilty than when eyewitnesses identified a suspect with absolute certainty but offered an unobservable justification (‘I would never forget him’) or no justification at all. Moreover, people perceive an eyewitness’s identification as nearly 25% less accurate when the eyewitness has provided a featural justification than an unobservable justification or simply no justification. Even when an eyewitness’s level of confidence is clear because s/he has expressed it numerically (e.g. ‘I am 100% certain’) participants perceive eyewitnesses as not credible (i.e. inaccurate) when the eyewitness has provided a featural justification. However, the effect of featural justifications – relative to a confidence statement only – is maximal when there is an accompanying lineup of faces, moderate when there is a single face and minimal when there is no face at all. The results support our Perceived-Diagnosticity account.     

法官庭外调查权的理解与适用

刑事诉讼法赋予了法官庭外调查权,但由于法律规定的过于笼统,使人们对法官庭外调查权的理解和适用产生了分歧。本文在贯彻法官中立原则和有利于被告人原则的前提下,对法官庭外调查权进行定位并从程序上对该项权利进行完善,从而防止审判权的异化并维护司法公正。     

污点证人作证豁免制度探析

污点证人作证豁免制度能有效分化瓦解犯罪联盟,是鼓励犯罪者和追诉机关合作的一项重要措施.其理论基础是反对强迫自证其罪的特权.我国法律中有关类似的规定并不是真正意义上的污点证人作证豁免制度,只是体现了其精神而已.在修改刑事诉讼法时,有必要对严重刑事犯罪适用该制度,并建立起相应的保障制度.     

我国行政听证制度存在的问题及解决途径

行政听证作为听证制度的一种,体现了公正、公开、民主原则,具有其他手段所难以达到的独特功能。其对促进国家管理的科学性、民主性,保障公民参与国家管理有着极为重要的作用。但是,从实施效果看,还存在不尽如人意之处。通过对我国行政听证制度的考察,剖析我国行政听政制度之缺陷,进而提出相关的改进和完善措施,以求实现我国依法行政的目的。     

论民法视野下人体医学试验损害的救济

人体医学试验不应因其具有公益性质而漠视受试者的权利。为了保护受试者的利益,研究者和受试者订立的知情同意书应该视为合同。试验过程中,受试者受到人身损害,可以选择向研究者提起违约之诉或者侵权之诉要求研究者承担损害赔偿责任。无论选择违约之诉还是选择侵权之诉,均应适用无过错责任原则。受试者的自冒风险行为可以作为免除研究者民事责任的事由,当然,研究者和受试者也可以就受试者自冒风险行为所招致的损害约定分担。     

“梁丽案”定性分析——兼谈盗窃罪、侵占罪以及非罪的界限

刑法中的持有物、遗忘物、遗弃物并不是相同的概念;财产犯罪的主观认识内容包括对全体客观的构成要素的认识;侵占罪中的"拒不退还"应是一个独立的构成要件;对"梁丽案"的定性应区分为两个阶段分别进行。     

包庇罪作假证明问题分析——兼谈包庇罪与伪证罪的区别

作假证明是包庇罪的核心行为,从作假证明的主体、阶段、行为及目的要素等方面进行分析,并与伪证罪的相关问题进行比较,会更好地解决包庇罪与伪证罪认定中的若干疑难问题。具体说来,作假证明的主体应包括被害人,发生的阶段是在刑事诉讼过程中,行为方式是积极的作为方式,目的是使犯罪的人逃避法律制裁。