References

• 2006Uncertain Judgements: Eliciting Experts' Probabilities1,549 cited
• 2011Measuring the validity and reliability of forensic likelihood-ratio systems165 cited
• 2016A guideline for the validation of likelihood ratio methods used for forensic evidence evaluation153 cited
• 2009Painting the target around the matching profile: the Texas sharpshooter fallacy in forensic DNA interpretation96 cited
• 2016Model forensic science60 cited
• 2015Minimizing Contextual Bias in Forensic Casework50 cited
• 2016What should a forensic practitioner's likelihood ratio be?45 cited
• 2013Distinguishing between forensic science and forensic pseudoscience: Testing of validity and reliability, and approaches to forensic voice comparison42 cited
• 2015Forensic Science and the Administration of Justice: Critical Issues and Directions36 cited
• 2018What do the experts know? Calibration, precision, and the wisdom of crowds among forensic handwriting experts32 cited
• 2016A comment on the PCAST report: Skip the “match”/“non-match” stage30 cited
• 2019Assessing the Admissibility of a New Generation of Forensic Voice Comparison Testimony28 cited
• 2013Forensic strength of evidence statements should preferably be likelihood ratios calculated using relevant data, quantitative measurements, and statistical models – a response to Lennard (2013) Fingerprint identification: how far have we come?18 cited