Distributed belief revision as applied within a descriptive model of jury deliberations

Belief revision is a well-research topic within AI. We argue that the new model of distributed belief revision as discussed here is suitable for general modelling of judicial decision making, along with extant approach as known from jury research. The new approach to belief revision is of general interest, whenever attitudes to information are to be simulated within a multi-agent environment with agents holding local beliefs yet by interaction with, and influencing, other agents who are deliberating collectively. In the approach proposed, it's the entire group of agents, not an external supervisor, who integrate the different opinions. This is achieved through an election mechanism, The principle of "priority to the incoming information" as known from AI models of belief revision are problematic, when applied to factfinding by a jury. The present approach incorporates a computable model for local belief revision, such that a principle of recoverability is adopted. By this principle, any previously held belief must belong to the current cognitive state if consistent with it. For the purposes of jury simulation such a model calls for refinement. Yet we claim, it constitutes a valid basis for an open system where other AI functionalities (or outer stiumuli) could attempt to handle other aspects of the deliberation which are more specifi to legal narrative, to argumentation in court, and then to the debate among the jurors.

Research supervision and psychotherapeutic theory: bridging the research-practice-gap

Research supervision in the field of counselling and psychotherapy is a fruitful area for investigation in view of the fact that the research supervisory relationship is powerful and highly charged, whether consciously acknowledged or not. Researchers trained as counsellors and psychotherapists possess the skills to facilitate the emergence of, and work creatively with, impasses and crises, both in the research itself and the supervisory relationship, as a result of their training and experience in dealing with crisis and catharsis in clinical work. This paper will demonstrate these points using a case vignette from my work as a supervisor of research dissertations undertaken by students on a Masters in Therapeutic Counselling course. Drawing on narrative analysis, clinical supervision theory and discursive analysis it will look at the strengths and weaknesses of a 'psychotherapeutic' approach to research supervision.