最新刑事诉讼法修正案出台之前，侦查实验作为一种侦查措施在司法实践中发挥着重要的作用，但是由于法律没有明确规定侦查实验结论可以作为证据，其应用一直处于灰色地带。不承认其证据效力，如果对证明案件事实有关键作用不得不当作证据使用，就将侦查实验结论限定为笔录的形式归到勘验、检查笔录一类证据中。鉴于这种情况，学界关于侦查实验结论的证据化研究很少也是可以理解的。最新刑事诉讼法修正案将侦查实验笔录规定为法定证据种类，无疑是一项重大的进步。不仅有利于侦查实验结论在司法实践中充分发挥作用，还有利于引起学界对侦查实验及其结论的研究热情，促进其理论研究和发展。虽然最新刑事诉讼法修正案已经将侦查实验笔录规定为证据，但是笔者认为这种做法仍有局限，应突破法定证据形式的束缚，将侦查实验结论规定为证据，允许侦查实验结论以多种形式呈现，以便其更好的在司法实践中发挥作用。本文共分为四个部分，第一部分主要是对侦查实验的概述，并在此基础上总结出什么是侦查实验结论。在这一部分中，首先笔者通过对外国侦查实验的考察和对我国侦查实验的研究，界定了什么是侦查实验，其作用和任务有哪些。其次，通过我国学界和司法界对侦查实验的研究和应用经验，总结出侦查实验的种类、规则和实施过程。再次，根据学者们多年来结合司法实践经验与侦查学理论的研究，概括出侦查实验结果的审查和运用。最后，在前几项内容的基础上得出何为侦查实验结论以及为什么要将其证据化。本文第二部分主要探讨将侦查实验结论（而不仅仅是笔录）证据化在我国刑事诉讼中可能遇到的问题，主要分为三类。首先是理论争议问题，一方面对侦查实验结论的证据能力有争议，另一方面对侦查实验结论的法定证据分类有争议。其次是立法缺陷的问题，没有明文规定侦查实验结论的证据能力；缺乏对侦查实验及其结论的法律规制；法定证据分类限制侦查实验结论作用的发挥。最后则是司法实践中的问题，包括侦查实验结论在实践中使用的无序状态，法官对侦查实验结论没有限制的自由裁量以及对侦查实验结论救济程序和制裁措施的缺位。本文第三部分研究侦查实验结论的证据化问题，主要包括侦查实验结论的证据资格问题、证明力问题以及怎样在立法中对其进行完善。在证据资格问题上，笔者主要从证据属性的角度，论证侦查实验结论的客观性、关联性和合法性三个特征。在证明力问题上，探讨了侦查实验结论的证明力及其大小。最后，在立法完善方面，主要概括了对侦查实验结论证据资格，证据形式的法律规制，以及对侦查实验本身及其结论的法律规制。文章的最后一部分笔者则简单分析了在侦查实验结论证据化之后，在刑事诉讼司法实践中应注意的问题，即侦查实验的实施及对侦查实验结论的审查。

In the past, investigative experiments as a reconnaissance measures plays an important role in the judicial practice. Yet, since the law did not make a clear regulation that investigation conclusion can be used as evidence, its application has been in gray zone. Not admitting its evidence effect, if it has proved a key role to the case facts so that had to be used as evidence, it is limited to the form of the record which can be seen as belong to the inquest or examination record kind of evidence. In view of this situation, the laciness of the research on the evidence effect of investigative results is understandable. In the latest criminal procedure law amendment investigative results are regulated as legal evidence type, which is, no doubt, a major progress. It is not only beneficial to the investigation in the judicial practice, but also provokes scholars’ enthusiasm to research investigation experiment and results, promoting the theory research and development. Although the latest criminal procedure law amendment has the regulation of the evidence effect of investigative results, but the author thinks that this kind of practice is still limited, we must break through the bondage of legal evidence form. We should set investigative results as evidence, allow investigative results be present in many kinds of forms, in order to make good use of it in judicial practice. This thesis is divided into four parts, the first part is the introduction of investigative experiment, and based on this, summed up the definition of investigative results. In this part, first, by the research of the investigation from foreign to China, we know what investigative experiment is, the role and the task of it. Second, through our academic research and judicial practice, we can summarize the types, the rules, and the implementation process of investigative experiments. Third, according to the scholars many years research on the judicial practice and investigation science theory, we can generalize the review and use of investigative results. Finally, the above content is made on the basis of investigative results and why it can be used as evidence.The second part of the thesis is to discuss the possible problems when investigative results become evidence in our country's criminal procedure, mainly divided into three categories. First is the theory dispute, on the one hand, the evidence effect of investigative results is controversial, on the other hand there are different opinions on legal evidence classification. Second is the problem of legislative defects, laws did not rule investigative results as evidence. There is no the legal regulations on investigative experiments and its results. Legal evidence classification limits function of investigative conclusion. Finally, the problems in the judicial practice, including the disorder in the practice of using investigative results, unrestricted discretion of judge and the absence of regulation on relief program and sanctions. The third part of the thesis is to realize the evidence effect of investigative results, including the evidence qualification of investigative results, the proof strength in question and how to perfect in the legislation. In the part of the evidence qualification of investigative results, from the point of view of the evidence attribute, the thesis talk about the objectivity, relevance and legitimacy of investigative results. In the part of the proof strength, this paper probes into the proof strength and how to judge it. Finally, in the part of legislation, the thesis mainly summarized the evidence qualification of investigative results, the legal form and regulations. In the final section of the article, the author simple analyzes the problems which may appear in criminal proceedings, after the evidence effect of investigative results make a role in the judicial practice.