Research output per year
Research output per year
Research output
Search results
-
2018
A response to Marquis et al (2017) What is the error margin of your signature analysis?
Morrison, G. S., Ballentyne, K. & Geoghegan, P., 14 Mar 2018, In: Forensic Science International. 287, p. e11-e12 6 p.Research output: Contribution to journal › Letter, comment or opinion › peer-review
Open AccessFile -
2017
A comment on the PCAST report: skip the “match”/“non-match” stage
Morrison, G. S., Kaye, D. H., Balding, D. J., Taylor, D., Dawid, P., Aitken, C. G. G., Gittelson, S., Zadora, G., Robertson, B., Willis, S., Pope, S., Neil, M., Martire, K. A., Hepler, A., Gill, R. D., Jamieson, A., de Zoete, J., Ostrum, R. B. & Caliebe, A., 1 Mar 2017, In: Forensic Science International. 272, p. e7-e9 3 p.Research output: Contribution to journal › Letter, comment or opinion › peer-review
Open AccessFile -
2016
Refining the relevant population in forensic voice comparison – A response to Hicks et alii (2015) The importance of distinguishing information from evidence/observations when formulating propositions
Morrison, G. S., Enzinger, E. & Zhang, C., 11 Jul 2016, In: Science and Justice. 56, 6, p. 492-497 6 p.Research output: Contribution to journal › Letter, comment or opinion › peer-review
-
2009
Comments on Coulthard & Johnson's (2007) portrayal of the likelihood-ratio framework
Morrison, G. S., Dec 2009, In: Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences. 41, 2, p. 155-161 7 p.Research output: Contribution to journal › Letter, comment or opinion › peer-review
-
Forensic voice comparison and the paradigm shift
Morrison, G. S., Dec 2009, In: Science and Justice. 49, 4, p. 298-308 11 p.Research output: Contribution to journal › Letter, comment or opinion › peer-review