Asking the Gatekeepers: A National Survey of Judges on Judging Expert Evidence in a Post-Daubert World

Drawing on the responses provided by a survey of state court judges (N = 400), empirical evidence is presented with respect to judges' opinions about the Daubert criteria, their utility as decision-making guidelines, the level to which judges understand their scientific meaning, and how they might apply them when evaluating the admissibility of expert evidence. Proportionate stratified random sampling was used to obtain a representative sample of state court judges. Part I of the survey was a structured telephone interview (response rate of 71%) and in Part II, respondents had an option of completing the survey by telephone or receiving a questionnaire in the mail (response rate of 81%). Survey results demonstrate that judges overwhelmingly support the gatekeeping role as defined by Daubert, irrespective of the admissibility standard followed in their state. However, many of the judges surveyed lacked the scientific literacy seemingly necessitated by Daubert. Judges had the most difficulty operationalizing falsifiability and error rate, with only 5% of the respondents demonstrating a clear understanding of falsifiability and only 4% demonstrating a clear understanding of error rate. Although there was little consensus about the relative importance of the guidelines, judges attributed more weight to general acceptance as an admissibility criterion. Although most judges agreed that a distinction could be made between scientific and technical or otherwise specialized knowledge, the ability to apply the Daubert guidelines appeared to have little bearing on whether specific types of expert evidence were designated as science or nonscience. Moreover, judges' bench philosophy of science seemed to reflect the rhetoric, rather than the substance, of Daubert. Implications of these results for the evolving relationship between science and law and the ongoing debates about Frye, Daubert, Joiner, and Kumho are discussed.     

Inmate family functioning

Two-hundred-nine noninmates and 169 inmates completed questionnaires that assessed retrospective perceptions of 12 dimensions of family life and one overall assessment of quality of family life. Between the inmates and noninmates, means for all dependent variables differed significantly except for self-reliance; however, meaningful eta-squares were found only for dimensions of bridging, disengagement, and quality of life. Among the independent-samples t tests for gender, eta-squares were not meaningful. Implications for family life interventions in correctional facilities are suggested.     

Issues in Implementing a Comprehensive Intervention for Public School Children With Autism Spectrum Disorders

Many students with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are educated separately from their typically developing peers, while others are placed in inclusive classes but without supports that would help them benefit from less restrictive placements. The needs of students with ASD who are in inclusive settings are often not planned for or met appropriately, resulting in continuing problems and movement to increasingly restrictive environments or private placements. There is a critical need for school models to fill the gap in appropriate services for this population of children with ASD. These models should include those that are inclusive and academically challenging, that can be implemented by many school districts, and that are responsive to the unique combination of strengths and deficits in these students. In the current article, the authors describe the development and core components of the model, and implementation of the ASD Nest program in public schools in New York City.