Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Contributors
- Preface
- Part I Academic Cheating
- Part II Academic Excuses and Fairness
- Part III Authorship and Credit
- Part IV Confidentiality’s Limits
- Part V Data Analysis, Reporting, and Sharing
- Part VI Designing Research
- Part VII Fabricating Data
- Part VIII Human Subjects
- Part IX Personnel Decisions
- Part X Reviewing and Editing
- Part XI Science for Hire and Conflict of Interest
- 63 The Power of Industry (Money) in Influencing Science
- 64 The Impact of Personal Expectations and Biases in Preparing Expert Testimony
- 65 The Fragility of Truth in Expert Testimony
- 66 A Surprising Request from a Grant Monitor
- 67 Whoever Pays the Piper Calls the Tune
- 68 How to Protect Scientific Integrity under Social and Political Pressure
- 69 Commentary to Part XI
- Epilogue Why Is Ethical Behavior Challenging?
- Index
64 - The Impact of Personal Expectations and Biases in Preparing Expert Testimony
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 February 2015
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Contributors
- Preface
- Part I Academic Cheating
- Part II Academic Excuses and Fairness
- Part III Authorship and Credit
- Part IV Confidentiality’s Limits
- Part V Data Analysis, Reporting, and Sharing
- Part VI Designing Research
- Part VII Fabricating Data
- Part VIII Human Subjects
- Part IX Personnel Decisions
- Part X Reviewing and Editing
- Part XI Science for Hire and Conflict of Interest
- 63 The Power of Industry (Money) in Influencing Science
- 64 The Impact of Personal Expectations and Biases in Preparing Expert Testimony
- 65 The Fragility of Truth in Expert Testimony
- 66 A Surprising Request from a Grant Monitor
- 67 Whoever Pays the Piper Calls the Tune
- 68 How to Protect Scientific Integrity under Social and Political Pressure
- 69 Commentary to Part XI
- Epilogue Why Is Ethical Behavior Challenging?
- Index
Summary
A considerable number of years ago I began to be asked to provide “expert witness” reports in relation to a number of court cases. Having agreed to do this I not only (and obviously) chose to read all that I could find on how best to do this; I also read information available to lawyers about how they should “deal with” expert witnesses, so as to prepare myself for dealing with lawyers (who can be demanding, sometimes arrogant, people).
Subsequent to the publication in 1992 by the government in England and Wales of the “Memorandum of Good Practice on Video Recorded Interviews with Child Witnesses for Criminal Proceedings” (that I and a law professor were commissioned to draft), I have been asked on numerous occasions to provide an “expert” report on how well (alleged) child victims/witnesses were interviewed (these having been routinely video-recorded since 1992 and often used as evidence-in-chief).
When asked to provide such reports (and indeed on related topics such as the interviewing of suspects, routinely audiotaped in England and Wales since 1986), I have always insisted that I will not discuss with the retaining lawyers (or any other lawyers) the contents of my report until after I have sent the report in writing to them. Once the report is in, I am willing to change some of my wording only for the purposes of clarity, but I am not willing to change my comments/conclusions/advice. The relevant books for lawyers that I had read (and my discussions with some other “expert” psychologists) had forewarned me of some of the ethical issues that might arise if lawyers try to inl uence unduly the content of my “expert” reports (and any of my subsequent testimony).
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Ethical Challenges in the Behavioral and Brain SciencesCase Studies and Commentaries, pp. 200 - 201Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2015