Predefined criteria and interpretative flexibility in legal courts’ evaluation of expertise

Overview of attention for article published in Public Understanding of Science, November 2019

Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter: 8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation: 6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley: 10 Mendeley

Summary X Dimensions citations

So far, Altmetric has seen 9 X posts from 8 X users, with an upper bound of 9,913 followers.

@ctmccartney The works of Jaakko Taipale that I have been engaging with recently. His paper in PUS is particularly relevant to discussions on whether Judges need to be educated on scientific standards: https://t.co/o4rP62PMJy

07 Dec 2020

Reply Repost Favourite

RT @jaakko_taipale: My new article out now in PUS, discussing analytical approaches to examining trial judges' evaluation of evidence. Giv…

17 May 2020

Reply Repost Favourite

Predefined criteria and interpretative flexibility in legal courts’ evaluation of expertise. #research article by @jaakko_taipale https://t.co/V7RhGWR0hM #ResearchHighlight https://t.co/nRCBLEbka8

23 Nov 2019

Reply Repost Favourite

RT @karhunmaak: A new read for all interested in sts, expertise and the use of medical evidence in courts https://t.co/Fhm7cwqyoA

07 Nov 2019

Reply Repost Favourite

This page shows the most recent X posts that mention this research output.

Click here to find out how to access more activity, including 5 additional X posts.