Enzinger E - Search Results

1

Reliability of human-supervised formant-trajectory measurement for forensic voice comparison.

Zhang C, Morrison GS, Ochoa F, Enzinger E. Zhang C, et al. Among authors: enzinger e. J Acoust Soc Am. 2013 Jan;133(1):EL54-60. doi: 10.1121/1.4773223. J Acoust Soc Am. 2013. PMID: 23298018

2

Use of relevant data, quantitative measurements, and statistical models to calculate a likelihood ratio for a Chinese forensic voice comparison case involving two sisters.

Zhang C, Morrison GS, Enzinger E. Zhang C, et al. Among authors: enzinger e. Forensic Sci Int. 2016 Oct;267:115-124. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2016.08.017. Epub 2016 Aug 16. Forensic Sci Int. 2016. PMID: 27592142

3

Empirical test of the performance of an acoustic-phonetic approach to forensic voice comparison under conditions similar to those of a real case.

Enzinger E, Morrison GS. Enzinger E, et al. Forensic Sci Int. 2017 Aug;277:30-40. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2017.05.007. Epub 2017 May 17. Forensic Sci Int. 2017. PMID: 28575731

4

A demonstration of the application of the new paradigm for the evaluation of forensic evidence under conditions reflecting those of a real forensic-voice-comparison case.

Enzinger E, Morrison GS, Ochoa F. Enzinger E, et al. Sci Justice. 2016 Jan;56(1):42-57. doi: 10.1016/j.scijus.2015.06.005. Epub 2015 Jul 3. Sci Justice. 2016. PMID: 26746825

5

What should a forensic practitioner's likelihood ratio be?

Morrison GS, Enzinger E. Morrison GS, et al. Among authors: enzinger e. Sci Justice. 2016 Sep;56(5):374-379. doi: 10.1016/j.scijus.2016.05.007. Epub 2016 Jul 29. Sci Justice. 2016. PMID: 27702454

6

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 GS, Enzinger E, Zhang C. Morrison GS, et al. Among authors: enzinger e. Sci Justice. 2016 Dec;56(6):492-497. doi: 10.1016/j.scijus.2016.07.002. Epub 2016 Jul 11. Sci Justice. 2016. PMID: 27914557

7

Consensus on validation of forensic voice comparison.

Morrison GS, Enzinger E, Hughes V, Jessen M, Meuwly D, Neumann C, Planting S, Thompson WC, van der Vloed D, Ypma RJF, Zhang C, Anonymous A, Anonymous B. Morrison GS, et al. Among authors: enzinger e. Sci Justice. 2021 May;61(3):299-309. doi: 10.1016/j.scijus.2021.02.002. Epub 2021 Mar 6. Sci Justice. 2021. PMID: 33985678 Free article. Review.

8

Score based procedures for the calculation of forensic likelihood ratios - Scores should take account of both similarity and typicality.

Morrison GS, Enzinger E. Morrison GS, et al. Among authors: enzinger e. Sci Justice. 2018 Jan;58(1):47-58. doi: 10.1016/j.scijus.2017.06.005. Epub 2017 Jun 19. Sci Justice. 2018. PMID: 29332694 Free article.

9

Validations of an alpha version of the E³ Forensic Speech Science System (E³FS³) core software tools.

Weber P, Enzinger E, Labrador B, Lozano-Díez A, Ramos D, González-Rodríguez J, Morrison GS. Weber P, et al. Among authors: enzinger e. Forensic Sci Int Synerg. 2022 Mar 7;4:100223. doi: 10.1016/j.fsisyn.2022.100223. eCollection 2022. Forensic Sci Int Synerg. 2022. PMID: 35281657 Free PMC article.

10

The opacity myth: A response to Swofford & Champod (2022).

Morrison GS, Basu N, Enzinger E, Weber P. Morrison GS, et al. Among authors: enzinger e. Forensic Sci Int Synerg. 2022 Jun 19;5:100275. doi: 10.1016/j.fsisyn.2022.100275. eCollection 2022. Forensic Sci Int Synerg. 2022. PMID: 35762013 Free PMC article.

Save citations to file

Email citations

Send citations to clipboard

Add to Collections

Add to My Bibliography

Create a file for external citation management software

Your saved search

Your RSS Feed

My NCBI Filters

Text availability

Article attribute

Article type

Publication date

13 results

Search Page