Results for 'expert testimony'

1000+ found
Order:
  1.  20
    Expert Testimony, Law and Epistemic Authority.Tony Ward - 2017 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 34 (2).
    This article discusses the concept of epistemic authority in the context of English law relating to expert testimony. It distinguishes between two conceptions of epistemic authority, one strong and one weak, and argues that only the weak conception is appropriate in a legal context, or in any other setting where reliance on experts can be publicly justified. It critically examines Linda Zagzebski's defence of a stronger conception of epistemic authority and questions whether epistemic authority is as closely analogous (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2.  38
    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.
    While courts depend on expert opinions in reaching sound judgments, the role of the expert witness in legal proceedings is associated with a litany of problems. Perhaps most prevalent is the question of under what circumstances should testimony be admitted as expert opinion. We review the changing policies adopted by American courts in an attempt to ensure the reliability and usefulness of the scientific and technical information admitted as evidence. We argue that these admissibility criteria are (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  3.  24
    Scientific Consensus and Expert Testimony in Courts: Lessons From the Bendectin Litigation.Boaz Miller - 2016 - Foundations of Science 21 (1):15-33.
    A consensus in a scientific community is often used as a resource for making informed public-policy decisions and deciding between rival expert testimonies in legal trials. This paper contains a social-epistemic analysis of the high-profile Bendectin drug controversy, which was decided in the courtroom inter alia by deference to a scientific consensus about the safety of Bendectin. Drawing on my previously developed account of knowledge-based consensus, I argue that the consensus in this case was not knowledge based, hence courts’ (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  4.  14
    Ethics Expert Testimony: Against the Skeptics.G. J. Agich & B. J. Spielman - 1997 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 22 (4):381-403.
    There is great skepticism about the admittance of expert normative ethics testimony into evidence. However, a practical analysis of the way ethics testimony has been used in courts of law reveals that the skeptical position is itself based on assumptions that are controversial. We argue for an alternative way to understand such expert testimony. This alternative understanding is based on the practice of clinical ethics.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  5.  14
    Institutional Constraints on the Ethics of Expert Testimony.Bruce D. Sales & Leonore Simon - 1993 - Ethics and Behavior 3 (3 & 4):231 – 249.
    We examined the dilemmas posed by the involvement of expert witnesses in court cases and the institutional constraints on the ethics of expert testimony. The causes for the incorporation of bad science into legal decisions, potential solutions to this dilemma, and the limitations of these solutions are considered. We concluded that law, science, and experts must respond to the problems posed by expert witnessing.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  6.  14
    Explaining the Tension Between the Supreme Court's Embrace of Validity as the Touchstone of Admissibility of Expert Testimony and Lower Courts' (Seeming) Rejection of Same.Michael J. Saks - 2008 - Episteme 5 (3):329-342.
    By lopsided majorities, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a series of cases, persistently commanded the lower courts to condition the admission of proffered expert testimony on the demonstrated validity of the proponents’ claims of expertise. In at least one broad area–the so-called forensic sciences–the courts below have largely evaded the Supreme Court's holdings. This paper aims to try to explain this massive defiance by the lower courts in terms of social epistemology.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7.  8
    A Testimony of Anaximenes in Plato.I. Plato’S. Testimony - 2003 - Classical Quarterly 53:327-337.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8.  1
    Expert Testimony, Law and Epistemic Authority.Tony Ward - 2017 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 34 (2):263-277.
    This article discusses the concept of epistemic authority in the context of English law relating to expert testimony. It distinguishes between two conceptions of epistemic authority, one strong and one weak, and argues that only the weak conception is appropriate in a legal context, or in any other setting where reliance on experts can be publicly justified. It critically examines Linda Zagzebski's defence of a stronger conception of epistemic authority and questions whether epistemic authority is as closely analogous (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9.  18
    Explaining the Tension Between the Supreme Court's Embrace of Validity as the Touchstone of Admissibility of Expert Testimony and Lower Courts' (Seeming) Rejection of Same.Michael J. Saks - 2008 - Episteme 5 (3):pp. 329-342.
    By lopsided majorities, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a series of cases, persistently commanded the lower courts to condition the admission of proffered expert testimony on the demonstrated validity of the proponents’ claims of expertise. In at least one broad area – the so-called forensic sciences – the courts below have largely evaded the Supreme Court's holdings. This paper aims to try to explain this massive defiance by the lower courts in terms of social epistemology.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10.  7
    Expert Testimony in Psychology: Ramifications of Supreme Court Decision in Kumho Tire Co., Ltd. V. Carmichael.Eric A. Youngstrom & Christine Pellegrini Busch - 2000 - Ethics and Behavior 10 (2):185 – 193.
    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. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  11. Inferences From Disclosures About the Truth and Falsity of Expert Testimony.Sergio Moreno-Ríos & Ruth M. J. Byrne - forthcoming - Thinking and Reasoning:1-38.
    Participants acting as mock jurors made inferences about whether a person was a suspect in a murder based on an expert's testimony about the presence of objects at the crime scene and the disclosure that the testimony was true or false. Experiment 1 showed that participants made more correct inferences, and made inferences more quickly, when the truth or falsity of the expert's testimony was disclosed immediately after the testimony rather than when the disclosure (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12. The Ad Verecundiam Fallacy and Appeals to Expert Testimony.Michael J. Shaffer - 2007 - In Proceedings of the 6th ISSA Conference on Argumentation.
    In this paper I argue that Tyler Burge's non-reductive view of testiomonial knowledge cannot adeqautrely discriminate between fallacious ad vericumdium appeals to expet testimony and legitimate appeals to authority.
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13.  4
    How Many Interpreters Does It Take to Interpret the Testimony of an Expert Witness? A Case Study of Interpreter-Mediated Expert Witness Examination.Jieun Lee - 2015 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 28 (1):189-208.
    Through the analysis of the discourse of an interpreter-mediated expert witness examination in a Korean criminal courtroom, this paper examines challenges in obtaining evidence from an expert witness through unskilled interpreters and the related complexity of participation status during the multiparty interactions, namely the courtroom examination. This paper, drawing on the participation framework theories, demonstrates how all participants are engaged in negotiation and interpretation of the meaning of the expert testimony. The two unskilled interpreters, who are (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14. Expert Testimony and Epistemological Free-Riding: The Mmr Controversy.Stephen John - 2011 - Philosophical Quarterly 61 (244):496-517.
    Using the controversy over the MMR vaccine, I consider the reasons why non-experts should defer to experts, and I sketch a model for understanding cases where they fail to defer. I first suggest that an intuitively plausible model of the expert/non-expert relationship is complicated by shifting epistemic standards. One possible moderate response to this challenge, based on a more complex notion of non-experts' relationship with experts, seems unappealing as an account of the MMR controversy. A more radical suggestion (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  15.  60
    Conflicting Expert Testimony and the Search for Gravitational Waves.Ben Almassi - 2009 - Philosophy of Science 76 (5):570-584.
    How can we make informed decisions about whom to trust given expert disagreement? Can experts on both sides be reasonable in holding conflicting views? Epistemologists have engaged the issue of reasonable expert disagreement generally; here I consider a particular expert dispute in physics, given conflicting accounts from Harry Collins and Allan Franklin, over Joseph Weber’s alleged detection of gravitational waves. Finding common ground between Collins and Franklin, I offer a characterization of the gravity wave dispute as both (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  16.  8
    Expert Testimony by Ethicists: What Should Be the Norm?Edward J. Imwinkelried - 2005 - Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 33 (2):198-221.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  17. Trust in Expert Testimony: Eddington's 1919 Eclipse Expedition and the British Response to General Relativity.Ben Almassi - 2009 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 40 (1):57-67.
  18.  2
    Expert Testimony by Ethicists: What Should Be the Norm?Edward J. Imwinkelried - 2005 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 33 (2):198-221.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  19.  23
    Expert Testimony by Persons Trained in Ethical Reasoning: The Case of Andrew Sawatzky.Françoise Baylis - 2000 - Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 28 (3):224-231.
  20.  12
    Seeing is Believing?: Expert Testimony and the Construction of Interpretive Authority in an American Trial.Curtis E. Renoe - 1996 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 9 (2):115-137.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  21.  3
    Expert Testimony by Persons Trained in Ethical Reasoning: The Case of Andrew Sawatzky.Françoise Baylis - 2000 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 28 (3):224-231.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  22.  11
    Expert Testimony at the Food and Drug Administration: Who Wants the Truth?Joel S. Perlmutter - 2011 - Narrative Inquiry in Bioethics 1 (2):78-82.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23.  9
    The History of Scientific Expert Testimony in the English Courtroom.Tal Golan - 1999 - Science in Context 12 (1):7.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24.  26
    Expert Statistical Testimony and Epidemiological Evidence: The Toxic Effects of Lead Exposure on Children.Richard Scheines - unknown
    The past two decades have seen a dramatic growth in the use of statisticians and economists for the presentation of expert testimony in legal proceedings. In this paper, we describe a hypothetical case modeled on real ones and involving statistical testimony regarding the causal effect of lead on lowering the IQs of children who ingest lead paint chips. The data we use come from a well-known pioneering study on the topic and the analyses we describe as the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25.  10
    Agich, George J., and Bethan J. Spielman. Ethics Expert Testimony: Against the Skeptics 22, 381. Agich, George J., and Royce P. Jones. The Logical Status of Brain Death Criteria 10, 387. Allison, David, and Mark D. Roberts. On Constructing the Disorder of Hysteria 19, 239. Anderson, W. French. Human Gene Therapy: Scientific and Ethical Considerations 10, 275. [REVIEW]Johann S. Ach, Susanne Ackerman, F. Terrence, Allan Adelman & Howard See Adelman - 2003 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 360:5310.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26.  21
    Laws of Men and Laws of Nature: The History of Scientific Expert Testimony in England and America (Review).William P. Gunnar - 2008 - Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 51 (4):650-655.
  27.  4
    Trust in Expert Testimony: Eddington's 1919 Eclipse Expedition and the British Response to General Relativity.Ben Almassi - 2009 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 40 (1):57-67.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28.  6
    At Law: Facts, Values, and Expert Testimony.Alexander Morgan Capron - forthcoming - Hastings Center Report.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29.  4
    Evidence: Oregon Court Excludes Expert Testimony in Breast Implant Litigation.R. W. Gifford - 1997 - Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 25 (2-3):221.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30.  4
    The Ethics of Expert Testimony.Louise B. Andrew - 2010 - In G. A. van Norman, S. Jackson, S. H. Rosenbaum & S. K. Palmer (eds.), Clinical Ethics in Anesthesiology. Cambridge University Press. pp. 261.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31.  4
    Facts, Values, and Expert Testimony.Alexander Morgan Capron - 1993 - Hastings Center Report 23 (5):26-28.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32.  2
    Institutional Constraints on the Ethics of Expert Testimony.Bruce D. Sales & Leonore Simon - 1993 - Ethics and Behavior 3 (3-4):231-249.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33.  2
    Need for Expert Testimony to Prove Lack of Serious Artistic Value in Obscenity Cases, The.David Greene - 2005 - Nexus 10:171.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34.  1
    Evidence: Appellate Court Dismisses Expert Testimony Under Daubert Standard.N. Jerabek - 1997 - Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 25 (1):73.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35. Tal Golan, Laws of Men and Laws of Nature: The History of Scientific Expert Testimony in England and America. Cambridge, Ma and London: Harvard University Press, 2004. Pp. VIII+336. Isbn 0-674-01286-0. £33.95, $52.50. [REVIEW]Graeme J. N. Gooday - 2006 - British Journal for the History of Science 39 (3):452.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36. Tal Golan.Laws of Men and Laws of Nature: The History of Scientific Expert Testimony in England and America. Viii + 325 Pp., Bibl., Index. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2004. [REVIEW]Carol Jones - 2005 - Isis 96 (2):280-281.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37. Commentary: Weighing and Comparing Expert Testimony by Medical Ethicists.Lawrence J. Schneiderman - 2000 - Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 28 (3):236-239.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  38. Commentary: Weighing and Comparing Expert Testimony by Medical Ethicists.Lawrence J. Schneiderman - 2000 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 28 (3):236-239.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39. Appeal to Expert Testimony – A Bayesian Approach.Lena Wahlberg & Christian Dahlman - 2015 - In Christian Dahlman & Thomas Bustamante (eds.), Argument Types and Fallacies in Legal Argumentation. Springer Verlag.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  40. Expert Opinion and Second‐Hand Knowledge.Matthew A. Benton - 2016 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 92 (2):492-508.
    Expert testimony figures in recent debates over how best to understand the norm of assertion and the domain-specific epistemic expectations placed on testifiers. Cases of experts asserting with only isolated second-hand knowledge (Lackey 2011, 2013) have been used to shed light on whether knowledge is sufficient for epistemically permissible assertion. I argue that relying on such cases of expert testimony introduces several problems concerning how we understand expert knowledge, and the sharing of such knowledge through (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   9 citations  
  41.  5
    Tipping the Scales of Justice: Deconstructing an Expert's Testimony on Cross-Examination.Pamela Hobbs - 2002 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 15 (4):411-424.
    American law is not a singlediscourse, but is the product of diverse andoften discordant voices; nowhere is this moreapparent than during the cross-examination ofparties and witnesses at trial. The sequentialorganization of witness examinations has drawn the attention of conversation analysts,who have examined the effects of theturn-taking system governing suchexaminations on the organization of theinteraction that occurs. This article appliesthe theoretical framework thus developed to theanalysis of an attorney's management of expertcross-examination in a medicalmalpractice case. The article demonstratesthat, rather than simply (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  42.  2
    Expert Bioethics Testimony.Stephen R. Latham - 2005 - Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 33 (2):242-247.
  43.  5
    Is There Any Indication for Ethics Evidence? An Argument for the Admissibility of Some Expert Bioethics Testimony.Lawrence J. Nelson - 2005 - Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 33 (2):248-263.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  44.  5
    Rebuttal: Expert Ethics Testimony.Françoise Baylis - 2000 - Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 28 (3):240-242.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45.  1
    Rebuttal: Expert Ethics Testimony.Françoise Baylis - 2000 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 28 (3):240-242.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  46. I Am Told by an Expert, Therefore I Know : Transmission of Knowledge (Pramaa) by Testimony in Classical Indian and Contemporary Western Epistemology.Arindam Chakrabarti - 2009 - In M. T. Stepani͡ant͡s (ed.), Knowledge and Belief in the Dialogue of Cultures. Council for Research in Values and Philosophy.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  47. Expert Bioethics Testimony.Stephen R. Latham - 2005 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 33 (2):242-247.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48. Is There Any Indication for Ethics Evidence? An Argument for the Admissibility of Some Expert Bioethics Testimony.Lawrence J. Nelson - 2005 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 33 (2):248-263.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  49. Evidence of Expert's Evidence is Evidence.Luca Moretti - 2016 - Episteme 13 (2):208-218.
    John Hardwig has championed the thesis (NE) that evidence that an expert EXP has evidence for a proposition P, constituted by EXP’s testimony that P, is not evidence for P itself, where evidence for P is generally characterized as anything that counts towards establishing the truth of P. In this paper, I first show that (NE) yields tensions within Hardwig’s overall view of epistemic reliance on experts and makes it imply unpalatable consequences. Then, I use Shogenji-Roche’s theorem of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  50.  38
    Character and Knowledge: Learning From the Speech of Experts. [REVIEW]Christopher W. Tindale - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (3):341-353.
    This paper discusses the ways in which a person’s character ( ethos ) and a hearer’s emotional response ( pathos ) are part of the complex judgments made about experts’ claims, along with an actual assessment of those claims ( logos ). The analysis is rooted in the work of Aristotle, but expands to consider work on emotion and cognition conducted by Thagard and Gigerenzer. It also draws on some conclusions of the general epistemology of testimony (of which (...) testimony is a special subset), where it is argued that we learn not just from the transmission of another’s beliefs, but from the words they speak. This shifts the onus in testimony away from the intentions of a speaker onto the judgments of an audience, capturing better its social character and reflecting our experience of receiving testimony. I conclude, however, that accepting the arguments of experts involves much more than simply believing what they say. (shrink)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
1 — 50 / 1000