@akuersten@mstdn.social that sounds fascinating! I was reading the other day [1] that jurors put too much weight to DNA evidence. [2]

And I'm wondering: to what extent is it the responsibility of lawyers/courts to contextualise data to non-experts? Or like, is evidence of mental illness better conveyed through other kinds of evidence, like expert testimony?

Your paper sounds interesting, might have a read of it some time later this week :)

1. https://theconversation.com/can-juries-still-deliver-justice-in-high-profile-cases-in-the-age-of-social-media-193843

2. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0194659507000470 (I haven't read this paper, it was just linked in the above article)