Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Opinion evidence refers to direct evidence outlining what the expert witness, believes, or infers in regard to facts, as distinguished from personal knowledge of the facts themselves. [1] In common law jurisdictions the general rule is that a witness is supposed to testify as to what was observed and not to give an opinion on what was observed.
There are many philosophical and historical theories as to how scientific consensus changes over time. Because the history of scientific change is extremely complicated, and because there is a tendency to project "winners" and "losers" onto the past in relation to the current scientific consensus, it is very difficult to come up with accurate and rigorous models for scientific change. [17]
Such evidence is expected to be empirical evidence and interpretable in accordance with the scientific method. Standards for scientific evidence vary according to the field of inquiry, but the strength of scientific evidence is generally based on the results of statistical analysis and the strength of scientific controls. [citation needed]
The nature of the history of science is a topic of debate (as is, by implication, the definition of science itself). The history of science is often seen as a linear story of progress [27] but historians have come to see the story as more complex.
Wigmore evidence chart, from 1905. A Wigmore chart (commonly referred to as Wigmorean analysis) is a graphical method for the analysis of legal evidence in trials, developed by John Henry Wigmore. [1] [2] It is an early form of the modern belief network. [3] After completing his Treatise in 1904, Wigmore "became convinced that something was ...
The history of scientific method considers changes in the methodology of scientific inquiry, not the history of science itself. The development of rules for scientific reasoning has not been straightforward; scientific method has been the subject of intense and recurring debate throughout the history of science, and eminent natural philosophers and scientists have argued for the primacy of ...
In science, objectivity refers to attempts to do higher quality research by eliminating personal biases (or prejudices), irrational emotions and false beliefs, while focusing mainly on proven facts and evidence. [1] It is often linked to observation as part of the scientific method. It is thus related to the aim of testability and reproducibility.
A large number of hierarchies of evidence have been proposed. Similar protocols for evaluation of research quality are still in development. So far, the available protocols pay relatively little attention to whether outcome research is relevant to efficacy (the outcome of a treatment performed under ideal conditions) or to effectiveness (the outcome of the treatment performed under ordinary ...