Do Demonstratives Improve the Procedural Safeguard of Opposing Expert Testimony?

Jury decision making.

“…Jurors who heard from the court-appointed opposing expert, however, rated an expert's research to be less valid when the experimenter knew which conditions the participants were in when conducting the research sessions than when the experimenter was blind to condition, suggesting that court-appointed opposing experts may be a more effective method of educating jurors about the quality of another expert's research. In another study, jurors who heard an adversarial prosecution opposing expert testify using a visual demonstrative to illustrate how to evaluate the quality of the defense expert's research methods were more likely to vote guilty when the defense expert's research methods lacked internal validity than when they were valid ( Yarbrough & Kovera, 2013 ).…”