Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Proving the UnprovableThe Role of Law, Science, and Speculation in Adjudicating Culpability and Dangerousness$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Christopher Slobogin

Print publication date: 2006

Print ISBN-13: 9780195189957

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: April 2010

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195189957.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2020. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 29 May 2020

The Current State of the Science and the Law

The Current State of the Science and the Law

Chapter:
(p.99) 6 The Current State of the Science and the Law
Source:
Proving the Unprovable
Author(s):

Christopher Slobogin (Contributor Webpage)

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195189957.003.0006

This chapter begins by describing the current state of prediction science, which is improving but is still almost as likely to produce inaccurate judgments as accurate ones. It also makes the crucial distinction between clinical prediction testimony and prediction testimony based on empirically derived probability estimates (which includes not only actuarial prediction testimony but might also encompass testimony based on what has come to be called “structured professional judgment”). The chapter then canvasses judicial decisions concerning the admissibility of prediction testimony, decisions that, despite the high error rates associated with predictions, are even more welcoming than the decisions dealing with expert opinions about culpability. Finally, it presents an evidentiary analysis of prediction testimony with an assessment of its materiality, a concept that raises particularly interesting issues in connection with prediction testimony based on group data and demographic information.

Keywords:   predictions of dangerousness, AUC values, false positives, actuarial prediction, structured clinical judgment, nomothetic prediction

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .