NCJ Number
131312
Journal
Behavioral Sciences and the Law Volume: 7 Issue: 2 Dated: special issue (Spring 1989) Pages: 181-196
Date Published
1989
Length
16 pages
Annotation
A critical review is presented of the type of testimony provided by psychologists with particular focus on ethical and legal relevancy.
Abstract
Clinical assessments and generalizations drawn from psychological research are the two main types of expert evidence provided by psychologists. Arguments for and against the use of this expert testimony are evaluated in three principal areas of testimony: evidence concerning eyewitness testimony, evidence about child sexual abuse, and evidence based upon clinical assessment. The evidence is examined in relation to the appropriateness of extending eyewitness research to forensic context, the ecological validity of research, the appropriateness of a psychological assessment of a child's credibility, and the reliability and validity of clinical assessments. On the basis of the evaluation of these arguments, it is concluded that psychologists face two fundamental problems when serving as expert witnesses. First, the type of assessments made may exceed the capacity of the discipline. And, secondly, the application of laboratory research findings to the real world or court situations is sometimes premature. The psychologists are encouraged to adopt a more conservative response to requests for expert evidence. (Author abstract modified)