Differences in expert witness knowledge: Do mock jurors notice and does it matter?

Caroline T. Parrott, Tess Neal, Jennifer K. Wilson, Stanley L. Brodsky

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The knowledge of experts presumably affects their credibility and the degree to which the trier of fact agrees with them. However, specific effects of demonstrated knowledge are largely unknown. In this experiment, we manipulated a forensic expert’s level of knowledge in a mock-trial paradigm. We tested the influence of low versus high expert knowledge on mock juror perceptions of expert credibility, on agreement with the expert, and on sentencing. We also tested expert gender as a potential moderator. Knowledge effects were statistically significant; however, these differences carried little practical utility in predicting mock jurors’ ultimate decisions. Contrary to the hypotheses that high knowledge would yield increased credibility and agreement, knowledge manipulations influenced only perceived expert likeability. The low-knowledge expert was perceived as more likeable than the high-knowledge counterpart, a paradoxical finding. No significant differences across expert gender were found. Implications for conceptualizing expert witness knowledge and credibility and their potential effects on juror decision-making are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)69-81
Number of pages13
JournalJournal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
Volume43
Issue number1
StatePublished - 2015

Fingerprint

Expert Testimony
Decision Making

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Differences in expert witness knowledge : Do mock jurors notice and does it matter? / Parrott, Caroline T.; Neal, Tess; Wilson, Jennifer K.; Brodsky, Stanley L.

In: Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Vol. 43, No. 1, 2015, p. 69-81.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Parrott, Caroline T. ; Neal, Tess ; Wilson, Jennifer K. ; Brodsky, Stanley L. / Differences in expert witness knowledge : Do mock jurors notice and does it matter?. In: Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law. 2015 ; Vol. 43, No. 1. pp. 69-81.
@article{144e9eb411a349f7b03e5302925d7d9e,
title = "Differences in expert witness knowledge: Do mock jurors notice and does it matter?",
abstract = "The knowledge of experts presumably affects their credibility and the degree to which the trier of fact agrees with them. However, specific effects of demonstrated knowledge are largely unknown. In this experiment, we manipulated a forensic expert’s level of knowledge in a mock-trial paradigm. We tested the influence of low versus high expert knowledge on mock juror perceptions of expert credibility, on agreement with the expert, and on sentencing. We also tested expert gender as a potential moderator. Knowledge effects were statistically significant; however, these differences carried little practical utility in predicting mock jurors’ ultimate decisions. Contrary to the hypotheses that high knowledge would yield increased credibility and agreement, knowledge manipulations influenced only perceived expert likeability. The low-knowledge expert was perceived as more likeable than the high-knowledge counterpart, a paradoxical finding. No significant differences across expert gender were found. Implications for conceptualizing expert witness knowledge and credibility and their potential effects on juror decision-making are discussed.",
author = "Parrott, {Caroline T.} and Tess Neal and Wilson, {Jennifer K.} and Brodsky, {Stanley L.}",
year = "2015",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "43",
pages = "69--81",
journal = "Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law",
issn = "1093-6793",
publisher = "American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Differences in expert witness knowledge

T2 - Do mock jurors notice and does it matter?

AU - Parrott, Caroline T.

AU - Neal, Tess

AU - Wilson, Jennifer K.

AU - Brodsky, Stanley L.

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - The knowledge of experts presumably affects their credibility and the degree to which the trier of fact agrees with them. However, specific effects of demonstrated knowledge are largely unknown. In this experiment, we manipulated a forensic expert’s level of knowledge in a mock-trial paradigm. We tested the influence of low versus high expert knowledge on mock juror perceptions of expert credibility, on agreement with the expert, and on sentencing. We also tested expert gender as a potential moderator. Knowledge effects were statistically significant; however, these differences carried little practical utility in predicting mock jurors’ ultimate decisions. Contrary to the hypotheses that high knowledge would yield increased credibility and agreement, knowledge manipulations influenced only perceived expert likeability. The low-knowledge expert was perceived as more likeable than the high-knowledge counterpart, a paradoxical finding. No significant differences across expert gender were found. Implications for conceptualizing expert witness knowledge and credibility and their potential effects on juror decision-making are discussed.

AB - The knowledge of experts presumably affects their credibility and the degree to which the trier of fact agrees with them. However, specific effects of demonstrated knowledge are largely unknown. In this experiment, we manipulated a forensic expert’s level of knowledge in a mock-trial paradigm. We tested the influence of low versus high expert knowledge on mock juror perceptions of expert credibility, on agreement with the expert, and on sentencing. We also tested expert gender as a potential moderator. Knowledge effects were statistically significant; however, these differences carried little practical utility in predicting mock jurors’ ultimate decisions. Contrary to the hypotheses that high knowledge would yield increased credibility and agreement, knowledge manipulations influenced only perceived expert likeability. The low-knowledge expert was perceived as more likeable than the high-knowledge counterpart, a paradoxical finding. No significant differences across expert gender were found. Implications for conceptualizing expert witness knowledge and credibility and their potential effects on juror decision-making are discussed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84924794805&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84924794805&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 25770282

AN - SCOPUS:84924794805

VL - 43

SP - 69

EP - 81

JO - Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

JF - Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

SN - 1093-6793

IS - 1

ER -