Human judgment and rules for admission of evidence
Cognitive science has provided us with insight into the workings of inductive reasoning, or how evidence affects judgment regarding the credibility of hypotheses. Inductive reasoning plays a critical role in decision making in many fields, including law and medicine. Confirmation judgments result from an individual's assessment of the degree to which a piece of evidence confirms a given hypothesis, e.g. whether an alibi confirms a juror's hypothesis that the accused is guilty, or whether a test result confirms a physician's hypothesis regarding a specific disease. The 'Investigating normative and descriptive uses of confirmation theory' (Induct) project conducted two experiments and extended theoretical models regarding confirmation theory. The researcher benefited tremendously from training and a summer courses, as well as from speaking opportunities at a variety of conferences and workshops during the course of the project. He co-authored several manuscripts, is preparing two more and has been offered an Associate Professor position. The results represent a significant contribution to the field of cognitive science and may have application in determination of rules for admission of evidence in court.
