| Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 100715 | International Journal of Law and Psychiatry | 2015 | 7 Pages |
Abstract
The current study investigated the efficacy of inoculation as a trial strategy designed to counter mock jurors' perceptions that an expert is a hired gun in a criminal trial. The effect of narrative and fragmented expert responses to cross-examination questions was also examined. The significant results were that not using inoculation led to higher ratings of expert knowledge compared to other conditions. Response style did not make a difference in the criminal setting. Implications of these results regarding “hired gun” expert witnesses and courtroom persuasion are discussed.
Related Topics
Health Sciences
Medicine and Dentistry
Forensic Medicine
Authors
Mitchell H. Ziemke, Stanley L. Brodsky,