In forensic science it is not rare that common sayings are used to support particular inferences. A typical example is the adage ‘The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence’. This paper analyzes the rationale hidden behind such statement and it offers a structural way to approach the analysis of this particular adage throughout a careful analysis of four different scenarios.
More on the question ‘When does absence of evidence constitute evidence of absence?’ How Bayesian confirmation theory can logically support the answer
P. Garbolino
2019-01-01
Abstract
In forensic science it is not rare that common sayings are used to support particular inferences. A typical example is the adage ‘The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence’. This paper analyzes the rationale hidden behind such statement and it offers a structural way to approach the analysis of this particular adage throughout a careful analysis of four different scenarios.File in questo prodotto:
File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
2019 More on the question.pdf
accesso aperto
Descrizione: Articolo principale
Tipologia:
Versione Editoriale
Licenza:
Creative commons
Dimensione
267.53 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
267.53 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.