Suppr超能文献

替代假设在减少法医专家决策偏见中的作用。

The role of alternative hypotheses in reducing bias in forensic medical experts' decision making.

机构信息

Department of Security and Crime Science, University College London, 35 Tavistock Square, London WC1H 9EZ, UK; Centre for the Forensic Sciences, University College London, 35 Tavistock Square, London WC1H 9EZ, UK; Law Faculty, Uppsala University, Sweden, Munken 1, Trädgårdsgatan 20, 753 09 Uppsala, Sweden.

Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, Sweden.

出版信息

Sci Justice. 2023 Sep;63(5):581-587. doi: 10.1016/j.scijus.2023.07.005. Epub 2023 Jul 17.

Abstract

Medical opinions are often essential evidence in criminal cases but relatively little is known about the factors that impact forensic doctors' decision making. This research examines the role and impact of having an alternative hypothesis while forming a medical opinion. A scenario-based experiment with forensic doctors (n = 20) was conducted. In two out of three scenarios, the existence of alternative hypotheses impacted the actual opinions reached, the confidence in the judgments and the perceived consistency with the plaintiff hypothesis. Investigative and legal actors should be aware of the possibility of biases and importance of having alternative hypotheses when requesting and evaluating medical opinions.

摘要

医学意见在刑事案件中通常是至关重要的证据,但人们对影响法医决策的因素知之甚少。本研究考察了在形成医学意见时持有替代假设的作用和影响。对法医(n=20)进行了基于场景的实验。在三个场景中的两个中,替代假设的存在影响了实际得出的意见、对判断的信心以及与原告假设的感知一致性。调查和法律行为者在请求和评估医学意见时应该意识到存在偏见的可能性以及持有替代假设的重要性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验