Show simple item record

Reconceptualizing the Burden of Proof

dc.contributor.authorCheng, Edward K.
dc.date.accessioned2014-06-26T19:00:21Z
dc.date.available2014-06-26T19:00:21Z
dc.date.issued2013
dc.identifier.citation122 Yale Law Journal 1254 (2013)en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1803/6515
dc.descriptionarticle published in law journalen_US
dc.description.abstractThe preponderance standard is conventionally described as an absolute probability threshold of 0.5. This Essay argues that this absolute characterization of the burden of proof is wrong. Rather than focusing on an absolute threshold, the Essay reconceptualizes the preponderance standard as a probability ratio and shows how doing so eliminates many of the classical problems associated with probabilistic theories of evidence. Using probability ratios eliminates the so-called Conjunction Paradox, and developing the ratio tests under a Bayesian perspective further explains the Blue Bus problem and other puzzles surrounding statistical evidence. By harmonizing probabilistic theories of proof with recent critiques advocating for abductive models (inference to the best explanation), the Essay bridges a contentious rift in current evidence scholarship.en_US
dc.format.extent1 PDF (28 pages)en_US
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherYale Law Journalen_US
dc.subject.lcshBurden of proofen_US
dc.subject.lcshProbabilitiesen_US
dc.subject.lcshEvidence (Law)en_US
dc.titleReconceptualizing the Burden of Proofen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.ssrn-urihttp://ssrn.com/abstract=2087254


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record