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.     

司法鉴定结论使用中存在问题及解决途径——兼论我国诉讼专家辅助人制度的建构和完善

鉴定结论是司法工作中经常使用的重要证据形式,但在使用中存在诸多问题。这主要是因为当事人及其司法人员缺乏相应的科学技术知识和专门知识不能对鉴定结论进行科学评判。通过建构和完善我国诉讼中的专家辅助人制度就可以从根本上解决鉴定结论运用中存在的那些问题。     

Are facial image analysis experts any better than the general public at identifying individuals from CCTV images?

The aim of this study was to examine the accuracy and reliability of a small group of facial imagery experts, and compare their abilities with members of the general public, to ascertain whether or not training and experience will affect the ability to identify faces from CCTV footage.A number of clips from CCTV footage were utilised alongside face pools. The participants were asked to identify the actor in each CCTV clip and provide a level of confidence in the decision.The experts tested in this study were consistently better at identification than the public, with almost double the identification rates and half the errors. These results suggest that training and experience in facial analysis will produce more reliable and accurate facial identification.     

医疗诉讼证据问题研究

诉讼的关键在于证据本身及其规则。一般来说,解决医疗诉讼的方式是：通过对各种医疗诉讼证据的运用来认知医疗争议事实。从而认定争议事实的客观真相,以此分辨出这争议事实中的是与非。从而顺利解决该纠纷;当出现证据不足或者证据灭失而导致无法认识医疗争议的客观真相时,就只能依靠医疗诉讼中证明规则来解决纠纷。病历真实、客观的疑问以及鉴定结论对因果关系认定的困难,使案件事实真相的认定出现障碍。应该改革病历的制作与管理,实行专家证人制度。我国现行的医疗诉讼实行举证责任倒置的证据规则,使医疗诉讼迅速增加,致使医院因赔偿导致的费用支出也大幅上涨。从而导致医疗费用的上涨以及医方为了减少医疗诉讼而采取防御性医疗措施,进一步加深了医患双方之间的矛盾。应该对举证责任倒置规则有所限制。     

交通事故责任认定的证据法学分析

交通事故认定不仅关系到民事赔偿份额,更关系到刑法上罪与非罪的认定,因此具有重要意义。交通事故认定书作为准鉴定结论类证据,鉴定人员应具备专业素质,享有准入资质;鉴定机构应具有专门独立的性质,以实现鉴定结论的中立性、客观性,为交通事故处理提供高效、权威的司法保障。     

司法鉴定行政与司法视角的边界——民诉证据司法解释鉴定内容的思考

2019年12月26日,最高人民法院发布了《关于修改〈关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定〉的决定》,备受司法界关注。其中,涉及司法鉴定的条款达24条之多,笔者结合《司法鉴定程序通则》,对相关内容予以了梳理与比较,揭示了民事证据规定给司法鉴定带来的变化与问题。民事证据规定重点规制了司法鉴定启动、受理、鉴定人出庭接受质询、鉴定人诚信承诺、鉴定人权利保障,鉴定人的出庭义务、遵守鉴定时限的义务,以及围绕鉴定资料的真实性、合法性方面的规定,以期保障鉴定质量。与此同时,民事证据规定也带来了管理上的边界之争的问题,包括司法鉴定行政管理部门与法院之间、法院与司法鉴定机构之间,以及法官与鉴定人之间权利义务的边界之争与之推,司法鉴定呈现多头管理已见端倪。本研究直面司法鉴定发展中的问题,建议尽早启动司法鉴定立法工作,强化鉴定意见的法庭质证,明确虚假鉴定的认定标准,梳理鉴定多头管理乱象等等,希望可以对司法鉴定制度的改革有所裨益。     

谈对司法鉴定结论的审查

司法鉴定结论是法定证据的一种类型,必须经过审查判断、查证属实以后,才能在侦查、审判中加以运用。文章从审查鉴定结论的合法性、科学性及文书制作的规范性方面进行了全面阐述,以便侦查人员、审判人员、律师工作者在司法实践中更有效地运用鉴定结论。     

基于文献与专家咨询的中医体质舌象特征研究

目的 构建中医体质舌象特征条目池并评价其在体质辨识中的贡献度。方法 梳理现有文献中中医体质的舌象特征,构建特征条目池,采用德尔菲法专家咨询形成专家共识。结果 通过22篇文献构建了9种体质104项舌象特征条目池,在此基础上,专家对舌象特征在中医体质辨识的重要性进行打分,形成7种体质20项的专家共识条目,总体评价均值为8.13分,其中血瘀质（8.76分）、痰湿质（8.53分）、湿热质（8.42分）和阴虚质（8.39分）表现出较高的贡献度。结论 不同体质具有不同的舌象特征,舌象特征对体质辨识具有一定的指导意义,但通过舌象区分体质类型具有一定的难度。     

Is China Losing its Appeal to Foreign Capital?

正CHINA,as an emerging economy,has experienced slowing economic growth since 2013.For the fi rst eight months of 2014,foreign direct investment(FDI)into non-financial sectors edged down 1.8percent from the same period in 2013.Certain domestic and overseas media have come to the conclusion that the frenzied infl ux of foreign capital into China is cooling down.But