In March 2024, Die Methode der forensischen Glaubhaftigkeitsbegutachtung im deutschen Sprachraum – Ein interdisziplinäres Plädoyer für eine kritische Bestandsaufnahme zur Anwendung der sogenannten „Nullhypothese“ in unterschiedlichen Verfahrenskontexten (Fegert et al. 2024a) was published. This work, funded by the Independent Commissioner for Child Sexual Abuse Issues (UBSKM), argues that the use of the null hypothesis testing approach in statement validity assessment (SVA) creates the misleading impression of a quantitative approach. The authors call for abandoning null hypothesis testing in criminal proceedings in favor of a qualitative approach that considers individual circumstances and conditions. For family court proceedings and social compensation law, they advocate for a complete abandonment of SVA, arguing that the evidentiary thresholds in these contexts are incompatible with null hypothesis testing. For social compensation law, they propose plausibility assessments conducted by healthcare professionals instead. The arguments presented by Fegert et al. (2024a) are based on flawed premises and lack reference to the scientific literature. All relevant textbooks indicate that SVA inherently follows a qualitative approach, accounting for case- and person-specific features. Thus, SVA conducted in accordance with professional standards already align with the approach advocated in the publication, rendering the criticism unfounded. While the term “null hypothesis,” has indeed led to misunderstandings, there is an international scientific consensus on the systematic testing of alternative hypotheses for evaluating the credibility of a statement. The varying legal contexts and their respective evidentiary thresholds must be taken into account. In conclusion, SVA conducted according to professional standards remain the best method for evaluating the credibility of a statement with continuous scientific advancement and quality assurance being essential.
