PSYCHOLOGICAL EVIDENCE IN THE COURTROOM - CRITICAL REFLECTIONS ON THEGENERAL ACCEPTANCE STANDARD

The increasing ties between psychology and law have familiarized psych ologists with the standards by which law admits scientific evidence in to the courtroom. In the USA, these include the general acceptance sta ndard and the Daubert guidelines and, in the UK, the Turner Rule. Howe ver, the psychological literature has largely failed to make clear the degree of legal debate that exists concerning the clarity and effecti veness of such standards. This paper will focus on the general accepta nce standard, examining key problems of this standard and placing them in a specifically psychological context. Such consideration is import ant precisely because the standard has become so well known within the psychological literature and because insufficient attention has been given to the way in which it operates implicitly within jurisdictions outside the USA, The authors argue that it is the responsibility of ps ychologists to become more involved in the debate concerning admissibi lity standards, given the credibility and authority that law accords t o psychology when admitting it into the courtroom. In particular, psyc hologists need to become more self-reflective about their role in crea ting and maintaining such standards. (C) 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.