How qualified is qualified? -- When experts rely on experts -- Consulting versus testifying experts: is there a problem? -- Retained experts and their testimony: hired gun or credible? -- Retaining and working with your expert -- Peer into counseling's black box -- Psychological evaluations: more than just testing -- Make sense of psychological tests -- Psychological tests and catching lies -- Make sense of computer-based test reports -- Collateral information: uses and abuses -- Tie experts to professional practice guidelines -- Let the records show -- Use Daubert's reliability toolbox -- Daubert's reliability toolbox: general acceptance and peer review/publication -- Daubert's reliability toolbox: testability and error rates -- Mental health testimony = conclusions + opinions -- Manage experience-based testimony -- It's research, but is it relevant? -- DSM-IV diagnoses: what's the problem? -- Use the analytical gap test: Joiner's versatile reliability metaphor -- Recognize and challenge experts' judgment biases -- Hiding the gap: the power of words -- Recommendations; where the rubber meets the road -- Interim reports: half-baked or reliable? -- Size up evaluation reports: what's the purpose? -- Mine the report's treasures -- Rescue an expert's testimony? try Daubert's flexibile side
The information below has been drawn from sources outside of the University of Wisconsin-Madison Libraries. In most instances, the information will be from sources that have not been peer reviewed by scholarly or research communities. Please report cases in which the information is inaccurate through the Contact Us link below.