Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

The misquantification of probative value.

D H Kaye1, Jonathan J Koehler

  • 1College of Law, Center for the Study of Law, Science and Technology, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA.

Law and Human Behavior
|January 17, 2004
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

A response to EA-4/23 INF:2025 "The Assessment and Accreditation of Opinions and Interpretations using ISO/IEC 17025:2017".

Forensic science international·2025
Same author

The scientific reinvention of forensic science.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2023
Same author

Fingerprint error rate on close non-matches.

Journal of forensic sciences·2020
Same author

Who needs special needs? On the constitutionality of collecting DNA and other biometric data from arrestees.

The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics·2006
Same author

Mock jurors' reactions to selective presentation of evidence from multiple-opportunity searches.

Law and human behavior·2006
Same author

The coming paradigm shift in forensic identification science.

Science (New York, N.Y.)·2005
Same journal

Viewing police body-worn camera video of use-of-force incidents: Does repeated or slow-motion viewing matter?

Law and human behavior·2026
Same journal

Psychopathy in the context of adversity: Understanding associations of early-life adversity and psychopathic symptoms in a sample of justice-involved youth.

Law and human behavior·2026
Same journal

Race and ethnicity in the courtroom workgroup: Can diversifying the court solve racial and ethnic disparities in case outcomes?

Law and human behavior·2026
Same journal

The justice motive: Retributive and restorative factors affect public evaluations of child protection.

Law and human behavior·2026
Same journal

A risk-need-responsivity (RNR)-informed systematic review of needs during the pretrial period.

Law and human behavior·2026
Same journal

When we do not care about what happens to "criminals": How character judgments influence indifference to incidental suffering in the criminal justice system.

Law and human behavior·2026
See all related articles

Evidence associated with low-base-rate crimes retains significant probative value. A re-evaluation using likelihood ratios demonstrates that seemingly weak evidence is actually diagnostic for crime investigations.

Area of Science:

  • Forensic Science
  • Legal Reasoning
  • Evidence Analysis

Background:

  • The probative value of evidence in low-base-rate crime scenarios is debated.
  • Prior analyses suggested such evidence has minimal diagnostic utility.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To re-evaluate the probative value of evidence when crime base rates are low.
  • To challenge the methodology used in previous assessments of evidence relevance.

Main Methods:

  • Critiquing the measure of probative value used by Davis and Follette (2002).
  • Applying the likelihood ratio as a more appropriate metric for evidence evaluation.
  • Analyzing the diagnostic power of crime-associated characteristics.

Main Results:

Related Experiment Videos

  • The chosen metric significantly impacts the perceived probative value of evidence.
  • Evidence previously deemed non-probative demonstrates diagnostic relevance when analyzed with likelihood ratios.
  • Low base rates do not render associated characteristics valueless.

Conclusions:

  • The methodology for assessing evidence probative value is critical.
  • Likelihood ratios offer a more accurate measure for evaluating evidence in low-base-rate crime contexts.
  • Evidence associated with rare crimes can be highly informative for investigations.