Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=613564
 


 



Behavioral Science Evidence in the Age of Daubert: Reflections of a Skeptic


Mark S. Brodin


Boston College - Law School

January 1, 2005

University of Cincinnati Law Review, Vol. 73, No. 3, Spring 2005
Boston College Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No. 48

Abstract:     
The piece briefly traces the history of the use of social science in the courtroom, and proceeds to critically measure this form of proof (particularly syndrome evidence) against both the reliability standards imposed by Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and the traditional requirements for admission of expert testimony. Drawing upon empirical research concerning juries and decision-making as well as transcripts of the use of behavioral evidence at trial, I conclude that much of this testimony should be rejected. Rather than providing meaningful assistance to the jury, social science experts can distort the accuracy of the fact-finding process and imperil the fairness of the proceeding.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 78

Keywords: expert testimony, syndrome evidence, social science evidence

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: November 2, 2004 ; Last revised: January 4, 2011

Suggested Citation

Brodin, Mark S., Behavioral Science Evidence in the Age of Daubert: Reflections of a Skeptic (January 1, 2005). University of Cincinnati Law Review, Vol. 73, No. 3, Spring 2005; Boston College Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No. 48. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=613564

Contact Information

Mark S. Brodin (Contact Author)
Boston College - Law School ( email )
885 Centre Street
Newton, MA 02459-1163
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 2,316
Downloads: 267
Download Rank: 67,609

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo6 in 0.266 seconds