The Evidentiary Value Model

  • Nils-Eric Sahlin
  • Wlodek Rabinowicz


Theories of evidence and theories of knowledge are intimately linked together. And there are many competing theories of evidence. One way to approach them is by way of looking at the theories of knowledge which are their bedrock.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


Works on the EVM

  1. [Edman, 1971]
    M. Edman. Indiciemekanismer. Department of Philosophy, Lund University, Lund 1971.Google Scholar
  2. [Edman, 1973]
    M. Edman. Adding independent pieces of evidence. In Modality, Morality and Other Problems of Sense and Nonsense, B. Hansson, ed. pp. 180–188. Lund 1973.Google Scholar
  3. [Ekelöf, 1962]
    P. O. Ekelöf. Beweiswürdigung, Beweislast und Beweis des ersten Ancsheins. Zeitschrift für Zivilprozess, 75, 289–301, 1962.Google Scholar
  4. [Ekelöf, 1964]
    P. O. Ekelöf. Free evaluation of evidence. ScandinavianStudies in Law, 8, 45–66, 1964.Google Scholar
  5. Ekelöf, 1981] P. O. Ekelöf. Beweiswert. In Festschrift für Fritz Baur,W. Grunsky, et al.,eds. Tübingen, 1981.Google Scholar
  6. [Ekelöf, 1982]
    R O. Ekelöf. Rättegdng IV, first edition, Stockholm 1963. Fifth edition, Norstedts,Stockholm, 1982.Google Scholar
  7. [Ekelöf, 1983]
    R. O. Ekelöf. My thoughts on evidentiary value. In Evidentiary Value, R. Gärdenfors et al., eds. pp. 9–26. Library of Theoria, CWK Gleerup, Lund, 1983.Google Scholar
  8. [Freeling, 1984]
    A. Freeling. Belief and Decision-Aiding, Ph.D. thesis, Cambridge 1984.Google Scholar
  9. [Freeling and Sahlin, 1983]
    A. Freeling and N.-E. Sahlin. Combining evidence. In Evidentiary Value, P. Gärdenfors et al.,eds. pp. 58–74. Library of Theoria, CWK Gleerup, Lund, 1983.Google Scholar
  10. [Goldsmith, 1980]
    R. W. Goldsmith. Studies of a model for evaluating judicial evidence.Acta Psychologica, 45, 211–221, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [Goldsmith and Andersson, 1978]
    R. W. Goldsmith and I. Andersson. Bevisvärdesmetoden versus temametoden vid juridisk bevisvärdering. Tidskrift for Rettsvitenskap, 91, 67–102, 1978.Google Scholar
  12. [Goldsmith and Sjöberg, 1979]
    R. W. Goldsmith and M. Sjöberg. Evaluation of Evidence by Judges and Public Prosecutors, Department of Psychology, Lund University, Lund, 1979.Google Scholar
  13. [Goldsmith, 1983]
    R. W. Goldsmith. Evaluating evidence in criminal cases by means of the evidentiary value model. In Evidentiary Value,R Gärdenfors, et al.,eds. pp. 104–114. Library of Theoria, CWK Gleerup, Lund, 1983.Google Scholar
  14. [Gardenfors, Hansson and Sahlin, 1983]
    R. Gärdenfors, B. Hansson and N.-E. Sahlin. Evidentiary Value, Library of Theoria, CWK Gleerup, Lund, 1983.Google Scholar
  15. [Gärdenfors, 1983]
    R Gärdenfors. Probabilistic reasoning and evidentiary value. In Evidentiary Value, R Gärdenfors et al.,eds. pp. 44–57. Library of Theoria, CWK Gleerup, Lund, 1983.Google Scholar
  16. [Halldén, 1973]
    S. Halldén. Indiciemekanismer. Tidskrift for Rettsvitenskap, 86, 55–64, 1973.Google Scholar
  17. [Hansson, 1983]
    B. Hansson. Epistemology and evidence. In Evidentiary Value,R. Gärdenfors et al.,eds. pp. 75–97. CWK Gleerup, Lund, 1983Google Scholar
  18. [Levi, 1983]
    I. Levi. Consonance, dissonance and evidentiary mechanisms. In Evidentiary Value,R. Gärdenfors et al.,eds. pp. 27–43. CWK Gleerup, Lund, 1983Google Scholar
  19. [Levi, 1993]
    I. Levi. Evidentiary mechanisms and routine expansions. Theoria, 59, 166–177, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [Rabinowicz and Sliwinski, 1992]
    W. Rabinowicz and R. Sliwinski. Some Scandinavian contributions to decision theory: An introduction. In Conceptual Models in Practical Philosophy–ScandinavianContributions, I. Pörn et al.,ed. forthcoming.Google Scholar
  21. [Sahlin, 1983]
    N.-E. Sahlin. Do people combine evidence according to an evidentiary value model? In Evidentiary Value,R. Gärdenfors et al.,eds. pp. 98–103. Library of Theoria, CWK Gleerup, Lund, 1983.Google Scholar
  22. [Sahlin and Freeling, 1983]
    N.-E. Sahlin and A. Freeling. Samverkan, motverkan och Dempsters regel: En jämförelse mellan tvä bevisvärdeteorier. Tidskrift for Rettsvitenskap, 5, 503–528, 1983.Google Scholar
  23. [Sahlin, 1986]
    N.-E. Sahlin. ‘How to be 100% certain 99.5% of the time’. Journal of Philosophy, 83, 91–111, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [Sahlin, 1989]
    N.-E. Sahlin. On epistemic risk and outcome risk in criminal cases. In In So Many Words, S. Lindström and W. Rabinowicz, eds. pp. 176–186. Uppsala 1989.Google Scholar
  25. [Stening, 1973]
    A. Stening. Om sammanstallning av bevisfakta och deras bevisvärde. Tidskrift for Rettsvitenskap, 86, 64–85, 1973.Google Scholar
  26. [Stening, 1975]
    A. Stening. Bevisvärde. Uppsala, 1975.Google Scholar
  27. [Stenlund, 1974]
    H. Stenlund. Concurring evidentiary mechanisms: A numerical study. Umeä Studies in the theory and philosophy of science, 9, Limed University, Umeä, 1974.Google Scholar
  28. [Stenlund, 1974a]
    H. Stenlund. Om motverkande indiciemekanismer. Umeä University, Umeä, 1974.Google Scholar

Other references

  1. [Cohen, 1977]
    J. L. Cohen. The Probable and the Provable, Clarendon Press, Oxford 1977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [Davidson and Pargetter, 1987]
    B. Davidson and R. Pargetter. Guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 65, 182–187, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [Hacking, 1974]
    I. Hacking. Combined evidence. In Logical Theory and Semantic Analysis, S. Stenlund, ed. pp. 113–123. Reidel, Dordrecht 1974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [Levi, 1980]
    I. Levi. The Enterprise of Knowledge, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1980.Google Scholar
  5. [Nozick, 1981]
    R. Nozick. Philosophical Explanations, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1981.Google Scholar
  6. [Sahlin, 1990]
    N.-E. Sahlin. The Philosophy of F. P. Ramsey, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [Sahlin, 1991]
    N.-E. Sahlin. Obtained by a reliable process and always leading to success. Theoria, 57, 132–149, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [Shafer, 1976]
    G. Shafer. A Mathematical Theory of Evidence, Princeton university Press, Princeton 1976.Google Scholar
  9. [Shafer, 1978]
    G. Shafer. Non-additive probabilities in the works of Bernoulli and Lambert. Archive for History of Exact Sciences, 19, 309–370, 1978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [Shafer, 1981]
    G. Shafer. Constructive probability, Synthese, 48,1–60, 1981.Google Scholar
  11. [Smets and Kennes, 1994]
    P. Smets and R. Kennes. The transferable belief model, Artificial Intelligence, 66, 191–234, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [Smets, 1995]
    R. Smets. The axiomatic justification of the transferable belief model. Technical Report: TR/IRIDIA/95–8, IRIDIA, Bruxelles, Belgium, 1995.Google Scholar
  13. [Todhunter, 1865/1965]
    I. Todhunter. A History of the Mathematical Theory of Probability,Chelsea Publishing Company, New York, 1865/1965.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nils-Eric Sahlin
    • 1
  • Wlodek Rabinowicz
    • 1
  1. 1.Departments of PhilosophyGothenburg University and Lund UniversitySweden

Personalised recommendations