首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Psychiatry Psychology and Law >Science or pseudoscience? A distinction that matters for police officers lawyers and judges
【2h】

Science or pseudoscience? A distinction that matters for police officers lawyers and judges

机译:科学或伪科学?对警察律师和法官来说重要的区别

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Scientific knowledge has been a significant contributor to the development of better practices within law enforcement agencies. However, some alleged ‘experts’ have been shown to have disseminated information to police officers, lawyers and judges that is neither empirically tested nor supported by scientific theory. The aim of this article is to provide organisations within the justice system with an overview of a) what science is and is not; b) what constitutes an empirically driven, theoretically founded, peer-reviewed approach; and c) how to distinguish science from pseudoscience. Using examples in relation to non-verbal communication, this article aims to demonstrate that not all information which is presented as comprehensively evaluated is methodologically reliable for use in the justice system.
机译:科学知识一直是制定执法机构内更好实践的重要贡献者。但是,有些所谓的“专家”已被证明向警察,律师和法官向警察,律师和法官传播信息,这些信息既不经验经验测试也没有得到科学理论的支持。本文的目的是提供司法系统内的组织,概述a)科学是什么,不是; b)什么构成了经验驱动的理论上成立的同行评审的方法;和c)如何区分科学与伪科学。使用实施例与非言语通信有关,本文旨在证明,并非全部呈现的所有信息都是全面评估的信息是在方法上可靠地用于司法系统。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号