I Spy with My Little Eye: Jurors’ Detection of Internal Validity Threats in Expert Evidence

dc.contributor.authorMcAuliff, B. D., & Duckworth, T. D.
dc.date.accessioned2014-12-17T20:18:59Z
dc.date.available2014-12-17T20:18:59Z
dc.date.issued2010
dc.description.abstractThis experiment examined whether jury-eligible community members (N = 223) were able to detect internally invalid psychological science presented at trial. Participants read a simulated child sexual abuse case in which the defense expert described a study he had conducted on witness memory and suggestibility. We varied the study's internal validity (valid, missing control group, confound, and experimenter bias) and publication status (published, unpublished). Expert evidence quality ratings were higher for the valid versus missing control group version only. Publication increased ratings of defendant guilt when the study was missing a control group. Variations in internal validity did not influence perceptions of child victim credibility or police interview quality. Participants' limited detection of internal validity threats underscores the need to examine the effectiveness of traditional legal safeguards against junk science in court and improve the scientific reasoning ability of lay people and legal professionals.en_US
dc.identifier.citationMcAuliff, B. D., & Duckworth, T. D. (2010). I Spy with My Little Eye: Jurors’ Detection of Internal Validity Threats in Expert Evidence. Law and Human Behavior, 34(6), 489–500en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2911507/
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11212/1982
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherLaw and Human Behavioren_US
dc.subjectresearchen_US
dc.subjectscientific reasoningen_US
dc.subjectexpert testimonyen_US
dc.subjectinternal validityen_US
dc.subjectjuror decision-makingen_US
dc.subjectchild abuseen_US
dc.titleI Spy with My Little Eye: Jurors’ Detection of Internal Validity Threats in Expert Evidenceen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Files