You don't know: knowledge as supportive alibi evidence.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Psychiatry Psychology and Law Pub Date : 2022-09-18 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1080/13218719.2022.2116608
Ricardo Nieuwkamp, Robert Horselenberg, Peter van Koppen
{"title":"You don't know: knowledge as supportive alibi evidence.","authors":"Ricardo Nieuwkamp,&nbsp;Robert Horselenberg,&nbsp;Peter van Koppen","doi":"10.1080/13218719.2022.2116608","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Until now, supportive evidence for alibis has been conceptualised into two distinct types: witness and physical evidence. The present study examined whether knowledge, as a third type of supportive evidence, can contribute to the understanding of evidence for alibis. Three experiments were conducted in which police detectives, laypersons and undergraduate students were asked to evaluate four alibis with witness, physical or knowledge supportive evidence, or with no supportive evidence. The results from the three experiments show that knowledge evidence is equally believable as strong witness evidence. We also found that not all items of strong physical evidence are evaluated as equally strong and believable. We therefore suggest adjusting the criteria to determine the strength of physical evidence and conducting more research on knowledge evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":51553,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatry Psychology and Law","volume":"30 5","pages":"695-712"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10512775/pdf/TPPL_30_2116608.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatry Psychology and Law","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2022.2116608","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Until now, supportive evidence for alibis has been conceptualised into two distinct types: witness and physical evidence. The present study examined whether knowledge, as a third type of supportive evidence, can contribute to the understanding of evidence for alibis. Three experiments were conducted in which police detectives, laypersons and undergraduate students were asked to evaluate four alibis with witness, physical or knowledge supportive evidence, or with no supportive evidence. The results from the three experiments show that knowledge evidence is equally believable as strong witness evidence. We also found that not all items of strong physical evidence are evaluated as equally strong and believable. We therefore suggest adjusting the criteria to determine the strength of physical evidence and conducting more research on knowledge evidence.

你不知道:作为支持不在场证明的知识。
到目前为止,不在场证明的支持性证据被概念化为两种不同的类型:证人和物证。本研究考察了知识作为第三类支持性证据是否有助于理解不在场证明的证据。进行了三项实验,要求警探、非专业人员和本科生在有证人、身体或知识支持证据或没有支持证据的情况下评估四项不在场证明。三个实验的结果表明,知识证据与有力的证人证据同样可信。我们还发现,并非所有有力的物证都被评估为同样有力和可信。因此,我们建议调整确定物证强度的标准,并对知识证据进行更多的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: Psychiatry, Psychology and Law is rapidly becoming a driving force behind the up-to-date examination of forensic issues in psychiatry and psychology. It is a fully refereed journal with outstanding academic and professional representation on its editorial board and is aimed at health, mental health and legal professionals. The journal aims to publish and disseminate information regarding research and development in forensic psychiatry, forensic psychology and areas of law and other disciplines in which psychiatry and psychology have a relevance. Features of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law include review articles; analyses of professional issues, controversies and developments; case studies; original empirical studies; book reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信