ABSTRACT
The admissibility of expert testimony in court is an issue assigned to trial court judges. When their admissibility decisions are appealed, the traditional rules that govern the scope of appellate review of trial court evidentiary decisions has resulted in appellate court deference to trial court decisions about the admissibility of expert testimony. This chapter addresses and evaluates the efficacy in the recent surge in legal activity. It briefly introduces the way in which the rules for the admissibility developed. The chapter considers the factors that drove the changing admissibility standards, and follows it with a critique of whether these standards accomplish their goal. Finally, it consider the potential role of psychology in aiding in the administration of this law and improving its implementation. Psychology can also play a positive role in shaping the implementation of the law of admissibility for expert evidence.
