Author's Keywords: Keywords: courts of appeals, attitudinal model, admissibility, scientific expert testimony, Daubert, trial courts	Convention All Academic Convention is the premier solution for your association's abstract management solutions needs. Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! Click here for more information.
Association: Name: American Political Science Association URL: http://www.apsanet.org
Citation: URL: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p65961_index.html Direct Link: HTML Code:

Buchman, Jeremy. "Applying Attitudinal Models to Federal Courts of Appeals: Appellate Review of Trial Judges' Decisions to Admit Scientific Expert Testimony" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston Marriott Copley Place, Sheraton Boston & Hynes Convention Center, Boston, Massachusetts, Aug 28, 2002 <Not Available>. 2009-05-26 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p65961_index.html>

Buchman, J. , 2002-08-28 "Applying Attitudinal Models to Federal Courts of Appeals: Appellate Review of Trial Judges' Decisions to Admit Scientific Expert Testimony" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston Marriott Copley Place, Sheraton Boston & Hynes Convention Center, Boston, Massachusetts Online <.PDF>. 2009-05-26 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p65961_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript Review Method: Peer Reviewed Abstract: This paper builds on earlier research (Buchman 2001) showing that trial judges' ideology has a statistically significant impact on their decisions to admit scientific expert testimony, as part of the gatekeeping responsibilities ascribed to trial courts in by the Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993). A major factor that gives trial judges substantial leeway in admissibility rulings is the deferential abuse of discretion standard governing appellate review. My earlier research on trial courts and attitudinal models of decision making acted on the assumption that appellate courts do indeed defer to trial judges' decisions regarding admissibility. Without empirically testing this assumption, however, one could not rule out the possibility that trial judges do not actually exercise a high level of discretion in this area, but instead find themselves noticeably constrained by superior courts.

The Legal Model and Daubert’s Effect on Trial Judges’ Decisions to Admit Scientific Expert Testimony

The Legal Model and Daubert’s Effect on Trial Judges’ Decisions to Admit Scientific Expert Testimony