Indexed metadata

A systematic account of probabilistic fallacies in legal fact-finding

Christian Dahlman

Source record

Source: Crossref

Published: Oct 29, 2023

DOI: 10.1177/13657127231209019

Open original source ↗

Source abstract

Evidence scholars have observed probabilistic fallacies in legal fact-finding and given them names since the 1980s (for example ‘Prosecutor's Fallacy’ and ‘Defense Attorney's Fallacy’). This has produced a rather un-organised list of over a dozen different probabilistic fallacies. In this article, the author proposes a systematic account where the observed probabilistic fallacies are organised in categories. Hierarchical relations between probabilistic fallacies are highlighted, and some fallacies are re-named to reflect the category they belong to and their relation to other fallacies in that category. All fallacies are precisely defined and illustrated with examples from real cases where they are committed by fact-finders. The result is a list of 12 probabilistic fallacies organised into 7 categories.

Evidence graph

No public relationships recorded yet.

Integrity note: This page is a factual metadata record created by deterministic ingestion. It is not a claim that the work moves a mathematical frontier or has been independently verified.

A systematic account of probabilistic fallacies in legal fact-finding — Mathematical Frontier Network