Expert Professionalism as Judged by Experts: An Empirical Pilot Study

Abstract

We conducted a pilot study about the professionalism of opposing expert witnesses as perceived by subject experts. The investigated topics included opponents' disorganization; forgetfulness; failure to examine a relevant party or review relevant documents; ignorance of the legal standard; giving an opinion or espousing a theory beyond the case facts or the relevant science; and replacement of objectivity with advocacy. We also looked at perceptions of opposing experts as “hired guns” and at treating professionals serving as experts. Significant findings were: opposing experts' lack of professionalism was perceived by half of the sample; lack of professionalism was attributed to espousal of idiosyncratic theories and loss of objectivity; participants professed a high degree of certainty about these views. “Hired gun” status in opponents and treating professionals as opposing experts were viewed as rare events.