The effects of daubert on the admissibility of expert testimony in state and federal criminal cases

Jennifer L. Groscup, Christina A. Studebaker, Steven D. Penrod, Matthew T. Huss, Kevin M. O'Neil

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

70 Scopus citations


Appellate opinions were evaluated on variables related to expert admissibility to assess the effects of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. in criminal cases. Analysis reveals changes in appellate courts' consideration of Frye v. United States, the 4 Daubert criteria, and several Federal Rules of Evidence. The importance of Frye and the general acceptance criterion decreased over time, and the importance of the Daubert criteria increased over time. However, these changes were not consistent for all types of testimony. Overall, there is greater reliance on Daubert when determining the admissibility of a scientific expert. However, only criteria related to the Federal Rules of Evidence are reliably related to admissibility decisions. Details of appellate court application of the 4 Daubert criteria, the Federal Rules of Evidence, and other related factors are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)339-372
Number of pages34
JournalPsychology, Public Policy, and Law
Issue number4
StatePublished - Dec 1 2002


All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Social Psychology
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Law

Cite this