Expert testimony in psychology: Ramifications of supreme court decision in kumho tire co., ltd. V. Carmichael
Ethics and Behavior 10 (2):185 – 193 (2000)
A recent Supreme Court decision, Kumho Tire Co., Ltd. v. Carmichael, may have substantial impact on psychological expert testimony. Previous criteria for admissibility of scientific expert testimony now apply broadly to expert testimony, not just testimony narrowly grounded in scientific evidence. Judges will determine the relevance and reliability of all expert testimony, including that based on clinical experience or training. Admissible testimony will either satisfy the criteria established in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. or meet similarly rigorous standards judged appropriate to the particular field involved. Because psychological testimony has varied in its evidentiary basis, sometimes relying on science and otherwise on clinical training or experience, court decisions will gradually determine the precedent for its admissibility. We also discuss long-term consequences for the credibility of psychological expert testimony and the relation between psychology and law
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
Ethics in Psychology: Professional Standards and Cases.Gerald P. Koocher - 1998 - Oxford University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
English Law's Epistemology of Expert Testimony.Tony Ward - 2006 - Journal of Law and Society 33 (4):572-595.
Institutional Constraints on the Ethics of Expert Testimony.Bruce D. Sales & Leonore Simon - 1993 - Ethics and Behavior 3 (3 & 4):231 – 249.
Expert Statistical Testimony and Epidemiological Evidence: The Toxic Effects of Lead Exposure on Children.Richard Scheines - unknown
Idealizing Science and Demonizing Experts: An Intellectual History of Expert Evidence.Jennifer Mnookin - manuscript
Argument From Expert Opinion as Legal Evidence: Critical Questions and Admissibility Criteria of Expert Testimony in the American Legal System.David Godden & Douglas Walton - 2006 - Ratio Juris 19 (3):261-286.
What's Wrong with Litigation-Driven Science? An Essay in Legal Epistemology.Susan Haack - 2008 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 32:20-35.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads7 ( #525,898 of 2,171,972 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #326,556 of 2,171,972 )
How can I increase my downloads?