Filters
Question type
Correct Answer
verified
Main points:
• Under the Daubert standard, judges are to decide whether to allow expert testimony.
• Judges are expected to be "amateur scientists".
• Judges do not have the training in research and thus cannot discern between good and not-so-good science.
• To improve the system, judges need to undergo mandatory training in research methods and be kept abreast of new scientific knowledge in the field of forensic psychology and other social sciences through continuing education.
Correct Answer
verified
Main points:
• Under the Daubert standard, judges are to decide whether to allow expert testimony.
• Judges are expected to be "amateur scientists".
• Judges do not have the training in research and thus cannot discern between good and not-so-good science.
• To improve the system, judges need to undergo mandatory training in research methods and be kept abreast of new scientific knowledge in the field of forensic psychology and other social sciences through continuing education.
Correct Answer
verified
Main points:
• The U.S. legal system is adversarial.
• Often, experts are hired by either defense or prosecution, with the expectation of helping one side of the trial.
• Lawyers tend to "shop around" for an expert who would testify the way the lawyer needs.
• Expert herself may have ideals or convictions she wants to advocate for.
• Being effective as an expert in court requires presenting a clear-cut, easy-to-understand picture.
• At the same time, science is rarely clear-cut or simple, it requires objectivity and skepticism about your own findings; conflicting explanations for the same facts are not uncommon.
Correct Answer
verified
Main points:
• The U.S. legal system is adversarial.
• Often, experts are hired by either defense or prosecution, with the expectation of helping one side of the trial.
• Lawyers tend to "shop around" for an expert who would testify the way the lawyer needs.
• Expert herself may have ideals or convictions she wants to advocate for.
• Being effective as an expert in court requires presenting a clear-cut, easy-to-understand picture.
• At the same time, science is rarely clear-cut or simple, it requires objectivity and skepticism about your own findings; conflicting explanations for the same facts are not uncommon.
Correct Answer
verified
Main points:
• Psychology and law represent two different cultures.
• They differ in goals (truth vs. justice), methods (data vs. rulings), and styles of inquiry (objectivity vs. advocacy).
• Psychology as a science is based on relativism (of knowledge and theories).
• Law as a system is rooted in the past (rulings, precedents).
• Psychology is more egalitarian, law is a more hierarchical system.
• Psychology is more open to change since science implies skepticism and new discoveries while law abides by past decisions (precedents).
Correct Answer
verified
Main points:
• Psychology and law represent two different cultures.
• They differ in goals (truth vs. justice), methods (data vs. rulings), and styles of inquiry (objectivity vs. advocacy).
• Psychology as a science is based on relativism (of knowledge and theories).
• Law as a system is rooted in the past (rulings, precedents).
• Psychology is more egalitarian, law is a more hierarchical system.
• Psychology is more open to change since science implies skepticism and new discoveries while law abides by past decisions (precedents).
Showing 1 - 3 of 3
Related Exams