FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2138156707> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2138156707 startingPage "1" @default.
• W2138156707 abstract "Foreword | Controversies over how the law should regulate the presentation of expert testimony on DNA forensic science were explored in an experimental study comparing traditional verbal with audiovisual modes of delivery. Pre-trial DNA knowledge, as assessed in 3,611 jury-eligible Australians, was limited. From this group, 470 citizens watched a simulated homicide trial containing a cognitively-sequenced generic tutorial on DNA profiling evidence. The expert tutorial significantly improved DNA knowledge, irrespective of the mode of presentation. Given clear and well-sequenced complex information, lay jurors dealt competently with it. Only jurors with little knowledge of DNA who were exposed to verbally presented evidence deferred to the expert's views. The multimedia tutorial effectively improved the decision-making of people whose comprehension of the scientific evidence was lowest, bringing their verdicts in line with those whose understanding of the evidence was most accurate. Enhanced DNA knowledge increased scepticism about experts and reduced convictions. These results will aid courts and policymakers in adopting procedures to enhance justice in criminal cases in which DNA is introduced. Adam Tomison Director Use of DNA evidence in Australian courts has increased exponentially since 1989 (Easteal & Easteal 1990; Walsh et al. 2004). After 20 years, DNA technology is well-tested and is no longer the subject of defence challenges (Haesler 2008). Increasingly, a single forensic expert guides the jury through the DNA evidence; in five out of six DNA cases studied in New South Wales, this was the model (Findlay 2008). The presence of DNA evidence predicts convictions. Archival research revealed that juries were 23 times more likely to vote guilty in homicide cases and 33 times more likely to vote guilty in sexual assault cases when DNA evidence was admitted (Briody 2004). Concern has arisen that the safety of these verdicts may be compromised by widespread misconceptions about the infallibility of DNA evidence (Gans & Urbas 2002) by jurors who are Overawed by the scientific garb in which the evidence is presented and attach greater weight to it than it is capable of bearing' (R ? Duke 1979 22 SASSR 46 per King CJ: 48). Field studies, interviews with actual jurors and jury simulations confirm that individual jurors struggle to understand and apply the statistical information conveyed by forensic experts about the likelihood that the DNA match occurred randomly, by chance alone (Findlay & Grix 2003; Lieberman et al. 2008; Schklar & Diamond 1999; Wheate 2006). The problem with misunderstood evidence is that it may compromise justice. Post-trial interviews of jurors who served on six criminal trials in New South Wales disclosed that jurors who admitted difficulty understanding DNA expert evidence nevertheless proceeded to convict (Findlay 2008). To minimise biases, investigation of methods to facilitate juror understanding of the probative value of DNA evidence was identified as a crucial area for empirical research (National Research Council 1996). Attention first focused on a traditional legal safeguard- jury directions. In Australia, the judiciary were advised to 'develop a model jury direction for use where DNA evidence has been admitted in criminal proceedings' to aid judges and juries in evaluating DNA evidence (ALRC 2003: Ree 44-2). However, one controlled experiment testing the Australian Law Reform Commission's model instruction showed it was ineffective (Dartnall & Goodman-Delahunty 2006). Jury deliberation has also proved inadequate (Findlay 2008; Wheate 2006). Jurors' educational levels were more substantial contributors to comprehension than deliberation (Dann, Hans & Kaye 2007). Recently, attention has shifted to features of the expert evidence (Bornstein 2004), to reduce misplaced reliance by jurors on pre-existing beliefs about DNA profiling and to enhance jury comprehension (Edmond & Mercer 1999). …" @default.
• W2138156707 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2138156707 creator A5026810766 @default.
• W2138156707 creator A5089312493 @default.
• W2138156707 date "2010-04-12" @default.
• W2138156707 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W2138156707 title "Enhancing fairness in DNA jury trials" @default.
• W2138156707 cites W1516614057 @default.
• W2138156707 cites W1978758186 @default.
• W2138156707 cites W2010824342 @default.
• W2138156707 cites W2030508568 @default.
• W2138156707 cites W2049157563 @default.
• W2138156707 cites W2052061063 @default.
• W2138156707 cites W2057055579 @default.
• W2138156707 cites W2079040812 @default.
• W2138156707 cites W2084782910 @default.
• W2138156707 cites W2102617029 @default.
• W2138156707 cites W2106509144 @default.
• W2138156707 cites W2128564903 @default.
• W2138156707 cites W2132185875 @default.
• W2138156707 cites W2170964596 @default.
• W2138156707 cites W2255901834 @default.
• W2138156707 cites W2338235241 @default.
• W2138156707 cites W281495720 @default.
• W2138156707 cites W3123282085 @default.
• W2138156707 cites W632793222 @default.
• W2138156707 hasPublicationYear "2010" @default.
• W2138156707 type Work @default.
• W2138156707 sameAs 2138156707 @default.
• W2138156707 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2138156707 countsByYear W21381567072012 @default.
• W2138156707 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2138156707 hasAuthorship W2138156707A5026810766 @default.
• W2138156707 hasAuthorship W2138156707A5089312493 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConcept C124056412 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConcept C18296254 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConcept C2776119841 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConcept C2777601897 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConcept C2778083451 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConceptScore W2138156707C111472728 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConceptScore W2138156707C124056412 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConceptScore W2138156707C126838900 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConceptScore W2138156707C138885662 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConceptScore W2138156707C15744967 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConceptScore W2138156707C17744445 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConceptScore W2138156707C18296254 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConceptScore W2138156707C199539241 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConceptScore W2138156707C2776119841 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConceptScore W2138156707C2777601897 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConceptScore W2138156707C2778083451 @default.
• W2138156707 hasConceptScore W2138156707C71924100 @default.
• W2138156707 hasIssue "392" @default.
• W2138156707 hasLocation W21381567071 @default.
• W2138156707 hasOpenAccess W2138156707 @default.
• W2138156707 hasPrimaryLocation W21381567071 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W1024233883 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W1486684527 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W1537710040 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W1557310418 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W172185783 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W1965458262 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W2030508568 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W2068611631 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W2106337187 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W2106509144 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W2107682921 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W2149152946 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W2193179150 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W2242327700 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W234149692 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W2553642309 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W2606338674 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W3125687544 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W768288334 @default.
• W2138156707 hasRelatedWork W3124110686 @default.
• W2138156707 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2138156707 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2138156707 magId "2138156707" @default.
• W2138156707 workType "article" @default.