Akerlof, G. A. 1970. The market for ‘lemons’: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Quarterly Journal of Economics
Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. 1966. The social construction of reality. New York: Anchor Books.
Berger, V., Matthews, J. R., & Grosch, E. N. 2007. On improving research methodology in clinical trials. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 1–12.
Cole, S. 2007. Where the rubber meets the road: Thinking about expert evidence as expert testimony. Villanova Law Review, 803, 819–824.
Friedman, R. 2003. Squeezing Daubert out of the picture. Seton Hall Law Review, 33, 1047–1070.
Gestring, Brian. 2009. The Dawn of the ‘Forensic Science Provocateur.’ CAC News, 1st quarter 2009: 25–28.
Grann, D. 2009. Trial by fire. The New Yorker
, 7 September 2009. Downloaded 7 September 2009 from http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/07/090907fa_fact_grann?currentPage=all
Greene, S., & Moffiet, M. 2007. Bad faith difficult to prove. The Denver Post
, 22 July 2007. Downloaded 28 January 2009 from http://www.denverpost.com/evidence/ci_6429277
Kennedy, D. 2003. Forensic science: Oxymoron? Science
Koppl, R. 2010. Organization economics explains many forensic science errors. Journal of Institutional Economics, 6(1), 71–81.
Koppl, R. 2005. How to improve forensic science. European Journal of Law and Economics
Koppl, R., & Cowan, E. J. 2010. “A battle of forensic experts is not a race to the bottom,” with E. J. Cowan Review of Political Economy, forthcoming.
Koppl, R., Kurzban, R., & Kobilinsky, L. 2008. Epistemics for forensics. Epistmeme: Journal of Social Epistemology
Mills, S., & Possley, M. 2004. Texas man executed on disproved forensics: Fire that killed his 3 children could have been accidental. Chicago Tribune
, 9 December 2004. Downloaded 27 January 2005 from http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0412090169dec09,0,1173806.story
NAS Committee on Identifying the Needs of the Forensic Sciences Community. 2009. Strengthening forensic science in the United States: A path forward
, National Academies Press, http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12589
Nichols, R. G. 2007. Defending the scientific foundations of the firearms and toolmark identification discipline: Responding to recent challenges. Journal of Forensic Science
Office of the Inspector General. 2008. Review of the Office of Justice Programs’ Paul Coverdell Forensic Science Improvement Grants Program. U.S. Department of Justice.
Pyrek, K. M. 2007. Forensic science under siege: The challenges of forensic laboratories and the medico-legal death investigation system. Amsterdam: Academic.
Risinger, M. 2007. Innocents convicted: An empirically justified factual wrongful conviction rate. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 97(3), 761–806.
Saks, M., & Koehler, J. J. 2005. The coming paradigm shift in forensic identification science. Science
State of Maryland v. Bryan Rose, Memorandum Decision, 19 October 2007, Circuit Court for Baltimore County, K06–545.
Thompson, W. C. 1995. Subjective interpretation, laboratory error and the value of forensic DNA evidence: Three case studies. Genetica
Thompson, W. C. 2009. Painting the target around the matching profile: The Texas sharpshooter fallacy in forensic DNA interpretation. Law, Probability and Risk
Thompson, W. C., & Cole, S. A. 2007. Psychological aspects of forensic identification evidence. In M. Costanzo, D. Krauss, & K. Pezdek (Eds.), Expert psychological testimony for the courts (pp. 31–68). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Thompson, W. C., & Dioso-Villa, R. 2008. Turning a blind eye to misleading scientific testimony: Failure of procedural safeguards in a capital case. Albany Journal of Science and Technology, 18, 151–304.
Turner, S. 2001. What is the problem with experts? Social Studies of Science
Willingham v. State, 897 S.W.2d. 351, 357, Tex.Crim.App. 1995.