Coherence and Probability in Legal Evidence

Dahlman, C. & Mackor, A-R., Dec-2019, In : Law, Probability & Risk. 18, 4, p. 275–294 20 p.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Copy link to clipboard


  • Coherence and probability in legal evidence

    Final publisher's version, 383 KB, PDF document

    Request copy


The authors investigate to what extent an evaluation of legal evidence in terms of coherence (suggested by Thagard, Amaya, Van Koppen and others) is reconcilable with a probabilistic (Bayesian) approach to legal evidence. The article is written by one author (Dahlman) with a background in the bayesian approach to legal evidence, and one author (Mackor) with a background in scenario theory. The authors find common ground but partly diverge in their conclusions. Their findings give support to the claim (reductionism) that coherence can be translated into probability without loss. Dahlman therefore concludes that the probabilistic vocabulary is superior to the coherence vocabulary, since it is more precise. Mackor is more agnostic in her conclusions about reductionism. In Mackor's view, the findings of their joint investigation do not imply that the probabilistic approach is superior to the coherentist approach.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)275–294
Number of pages20
JournalLaw, Probability & Risk
Issue number4
Early online date11-Nov-2019
Publication statusPublished - Dec-2019

ID: 108422419