English Law's Epistemology of Expert Testimony
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11449089 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Tony Ward (0000-0002-6292-2364, University of Hull, corresponding author), Anthony B Ward (0000-0002-9785-9158) |
| Year | 2006 |
| Volume | 33 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 572-595 |
| Publication date | 2006-12-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Law and Society (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0263-323X • E-ISSN: 1467-6478 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1467-6478.2006.00371.x |
| OpenAlex | W2151527002 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 1 |
The decision whether to believe an expert witness raises difficult epistemological and ethical questions for a lay juror or judge. This article examines the English courts' approach to these questions in the light of a series of cases which endorse the test of admissibility formulated in the Australian case o/R v. Bonython . It argues that, if interpreted more rigorously than it generally has been to date, Bonython could provide the framework for an approach which avoids the pitfalls of either a ‘scientistic’ or a ‘constructivist’ epistemology of expert testimony. Such an approach needs to distinguish between different types of expertise and the differing degrees of deference that they call for on the part of a lay fact‐finder
Deference · Epistemology · Expert witness · Political science · Sociology · Witness · Jury Decision Making Processes · Law · Legal Education and Practice Innovations · Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues · Philosophy · Psychology
| Citations per year | 0.21 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2007 - 2025 (19) |
| Highly cited | No |