Susan Haack brings her distinctive work in theory of knowledge and philosophy of science to bear on real-life legal issues.

Is truth in the law just plain truth - or something sui generis? Is a trial a search for truth? Do adversarial procedures and exclusionary rules of evidence enable, or impede, the accurate determination of factual issues? Can degrees of proof be identified with mathematical probabilities? What role can statistical evidence properly play? How can courts best handle the scientific testimony on which cases sometimes turn? How are they to distinguish reliable scientific testimony from unreliable hokum? These interdisciplinary essays explore such questions about science, proof, and truth in the law. With her characteristic clarity and verve, Haack brings her original and distinctive work in theory of knowledge and philosophy of science to bear on real-life legal issues. She includes detailed analyses of a wide variety of cases and lucid summaries of relevant scientific work, of the many roles of the scientific peer-review system, and of relevant legal developments.

This manual helps clinicians easily to find the best available evidence to facilitate sound medical decisions. It is the first published compilation of highly relevant InfoPOEMs that the editors believe has the potential to change a clinician's practice. The editors have selected over 300 of the most influential, compelling POEMs, and organized them by topic for easy reference. Each POEM contains: Clinical Question: Poses a question that the study seeks to answer. Bottom line: Summarizes the findings of the research and places these findings into the context with the known information on the topic. The bottom line also is designed to help readers understand how to apply the results. LOE: Each review is given a Level of Evidence indicator. This allows the reader to discern an overall sense of how well the new information is supported. Reference: Displays the citation of the article being reviewed. Study Design: Identifies the procedures of the study (i.e., Meta-Analysis, randomized controlled trial). Setting: Identifies the environment in which the study took place (i.e., outpatient, inpatient). Synopsis: Provides a brief overview of the study design and results, but is not an abstract. The editors have pulled out only the most important information – the materials that readers need to judge the validity of the research and to understand the results. The manual opens with two complementary, original chapters: 1) Introduction to Information Mastery which covers the skills physicians need to practice the best medicine. 2) An Introduction to Evidence Based Medicine that reviews the key concepts and principles behind this practice model.

In this comprehensive review of urban ethnography, Steven Lubet encountered a field that relies heavily on anonymous sources, often as reported by a single investigator whose underlying data remain unseen. Upon digging into the details, he discovered too many ethnographic assertions that were dubious, exaggerated, tendentious, or just plain wrong. Employing the tools and techniques of a trial lawyer, Lubet uses original sources and contemporaneous documentation to explore the stories behind ethnographic narratives. Many turn out to be accurate, but others are revealed to be based on rumors, folklore, and unreliable hearsay. Interrogating Ethnography explains how qualitative social science would benefit from greater attention to the quality of evidence, and provides recommendations for bringing the field more closely in line with other fact-based disciplines such as law and journalism.

Researchers use a variety of tools to determine their impact and efficacy, including sample surveys, narrative studies, and exploratory research. However, randomized field trials, which are commonly used in other disciplines, are rarely employed to measure the impact of education practice. Evidence Matters explores the history and current status of research in education and encourages the more frequent use of such trials.

Opinions about education programs and practices are offered frequently—by children, parents, teachers, and policymakers. Credible studies of the impact of programs on the performance of children are far less frequent. Researchers use a variety of tools to determine their impact and efficacy, including sample surveys, narrative studies, and exploratory research. However, randomized field trials, which are commonly used in other disciplines, are rarely employed to measure the impact of education practice. Evidence Matters explores the history and current status of research in education and encourages the more frequent use of such trials. Judith Gueron (Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation), discusses the challenges involved in randomized trials and offers practical advice drawn experience. Robert Boruch (Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania), Dorothy de Moya (Campbell Collaboration Secretariat), and Brooke Snyder (University of Pennsylvania) explore the use of randomized field trials in education and other fields. David Cohen, Stephen Raudenbush, and Deborah Loewenberg Ball (all from the University of Michigan) review the history of progress in education over the past forty years and urge increased research on coherent instruction regimes. Maris Vinovskis (University of Michigan) examines the history and role of the U.S. Department of Education in developing rigorous evaluation of federal programs, and suggests a new National Center for Evaluation and Development. Thomas Cook and Monique Renee Payne (both from Northwestern University) take on the claim that randomized field trials are inappropriate in the U.S. education system. Gary Burtless (Brookings Institution) explores the political and professional factors that influence randomized field trials in economic programs, examining possible explanations for their lack of frequent use in education. Carol Weiss (Harvard University) provides a brief history of community studies in the