Research Agenda 2026–2028
The research program focuses on judicial assessment of digital evidence, methodological development and validation, and interdisciplinary legal education.
The research program focuses on judicial assessment of digital evidence, methodological development and validation, and interdisciplinary legal education. Proposed studies seek to measure whether structured training improves the evaluation of forensic conclusions.
All tracks are presented with their verified status. No track is described as completed, funded, institutionally adopted, or under formal review unless that is documented.
Track I — Judicial Assessment of Digital Evidence
Research question: How do judges and attorneys currently evaluate digital forensic findings and expert conclusions, and where do systematic difficulties arise?
Proposed method: Doctrinal analysis of case law and evidentiary standards, combined with proposed interview and case-based study designs.
Potential outputs: Research articles describing the judicial knowledge gap and the analytical challenges identified.
Status: Proposed
Track II — J-DEAF Development and Validation
Research question: Can a structured, proposition-centered framework improve the critical evaluation of digital expert evidence?
Proposed method: Iterative framework development followed by proposed pre- and post-instruction case-based assessments measuring identification of unsupported conclusions and alternative explanations.
Potential outputs: A published framework specification and, if studies proceed and support the hypothesis, empirical findings on educational effectiveness.
Status: Proposed
Track III — Interdisciplinary Judicial and Legal Education
Research question: What educational formats best help legal professionals ask the right questions about digital evidence without becoming forensic examiners?
Proposed method: Proposed development of seminars, workshops, and case-based exercises, evaluated within the Track II study designs.
Potential outputs: Educational resources and, subject to results, curriculum proposals for legal and judicial education.
Status: Proposed
Related Work
Independently published research article · Dr. Shani Roffeh, Adv
The Judicial Knowledge Gap in Digital Evidence: From Technical Findings to Legal Conclusions
The distinction between digital data, forensic findings, expert interpretation, and legal conclusions — with references to NIJ, NIST, and evidentiary principles.