Human Factors Expert Testimony after Daubert (1993)
Gerald V. Barrett, Rafael Carneiro Ortiz
Abstract
Gerald V. Barrett, Rafael Carneiro Ortiz
Abstract
This paper reviewed Human Factors expert testimony after the Supreme Court decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993). Daubert (1993) set a new standard for Experts testifying in federal courts. Failure of a Human Factors expert to meet the Daubert standard will result in the exclusion of the expert's testimony. Court cases after Daubert (1993) were reviewed and principles were applied which resulted in acceptance or rejection of the Human Factors expert testimony. Considerations for Human Factors professionals testifying in court are discussed.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This paper reviewed Human Factors expert testimony after the Supreme Court decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993). Daubert (1993) set a new standard for Experts testifying in federal courts. Failure of a Human Factors expert to meet the Daubert standard will result in the exclusion of the expert's testimony. Court cases after Daubert (1993) were reviewed and principles were applied which resulted in acceptance or rejection of the Human Factors expert testimony. Considerations for Human Factors professionals testifying in court are discussed.
Key concepts: Supreme court, Law, Federal Rules of Evidence, Scientific evidence, Political science, Psychology, Philosophy, Epistemology