Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2477137
 


 



The Problem of Biased Experts, and Blinding as a Solution: A Response to Professor Gelbach


Christopher T. Robertson


University of Arizona - James E. Rogers College of Law; Harvard University - Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics; Harvard University - Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics

August 5, 2014

81 University of Chicago Law Dialogue 61 (2014)
Arizona Legal Studies Discussion Paper No. 14-18

Abstract:     
In a recent symposium article (Expert Mining and Required Disclosure, 81 U Chi. L. Rev. 131 (2014)), Professor Jonah Gelbach discusses the problem that a litigant in the American adversarial system can consult multiple expert witnesses on a given question but only disclose the single most favorable opinion to the fact finder (a jury, judge, or arbitrator). He calls this the problem of “expert mining.” In particular, Gelbach considers whether a policy that requires litigants to disclose to the fact finder the number of experts that they consulted might be a satisfactory solution to the problem. Alternatively, Gelbach considers whether an even more radical change to the American litigation system — the exclusion of all expert opinions rendered after the first one — might be necessary. In doing so, Gelbach extensively discusses my own work on this problem and the third solution I developed in a 2010 article, Blind Expertise, 85 NYU L. Rev. 174 (2010). There, I show that expert mining is one part of a broader problem of expert bias, and I propose a conditional-disclosure rule as the solution. This Essay provides some analysis of Gelbach’s framing of the problem, reviews the blinding proposal, and identifies the limits of Gelbach’s analyses.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 12

Keywords: expert witnesses, expert mining, expert bias, conditional-disclosure, blinding

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: August 8, 2014  

Suggested Citation

Robertson, Christopher T., The Problem of Biased Experts, and Blinding as a Solution: A Response to Professor Gelbach (August 5, 2014). 81 University of Chicago Law Dialogue 61 (2014); Arizona Legal Studies Discussion Paper No. 14-18. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2477137

Contact Information

Christopher T. Robertson (Contact Author)
University of Arizona - James E. Rogers College of Law ( email )
P.O. Box 210176
Tucson, AZ 85721-0176
United States
HOME PAGE: http://www.law.arizona.edu/faculty/getprofile.cfm?facultyid=714

Harvard University - Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics ( email )
124 Mount Auburn Street
Suite 520N
Cambridge, MA 02138
United States

Harvard University - Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics ( email )
23 Everett Street
Cambridge, MA 02155
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 70
Downloads: 25

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo8 in 0.609 seconds