Concepedia

Legal and psychological bases of expert testimony: Surveys of the law and of jurors

Behavioral Sciences & the Law · 1984 · 30 citations · 11 references

TL;DR

The article reviews basic rules of evidence and procedure that underpin the introduction of expert testimony in court. The study aims to review social‑psychology findings on expert testimony and to present original data on jurors’ assessments of diverse expert witnesses. The authors examined jurors’ evaluations of a range of experts—including physicians, psychiatrists, psychologists, chemists, document examiners, polygraph examiners, police, eyewitnesses, firearms experts, accountants, and appraisers—and tested explanations for subgroup differences. Jurors differentiated among expert types and among juror subgroups, and the study identified some factors explaining these differences.

Abstract

Abstract This article reviews the basic rules of evidence and procedure that provide the basis for the introduction of expert testimony into court. Second, it reviews some of the findings of social psychology regarding expert testimony, primarily the ways in which the structure of society affects what information will reach the court and what is the readiness of the factfinder to deal with that information. Finally, it reports original data on jurors' assessments of a variety of witnesses (viz. physicians, psychiatrists, psychologists, chemists, document examiners, polygraph examiners, police, eyewitnesses, firearms experts, and accountants and appraisers). Jurors' differential assessments of the different experts and differences among juror subgroups are reported and some explanations for a few of those differences are tested.