For Expert Witnesses, Superstars Aren't Always Best

Selecting expert witnesses is one of your most important tasks as you work up a case, but it’s hard to know if you made the right decision until after the jury returns a verdict.  Should you choose the Harvard superstar, the local expert who might seem less like an “outsider” to your jury, or perhaps a young hotshot who’s doing cutting-edge research?

It’s a tough question with no perfect answer – and the best solution will often vary case by case – but recent studies of how jurors evaluate experts shed some light on the issue.

First, it’s important to understand that jurors are often skeptical of any expert testimony – often preferring to label them “hired guns” rather than experts.  Although jurors find expert testimony essential in understanding complex technical issues, both our own research and academic studies have found jurors understand parties hire experts who will support their claims and believe experts are influenced by the side that’s paying them.

This skepticism is why an expert’s credibility is so important – when two experts are saying the exact opposite things, jurors must decide who to believe.

Interestingly, there is no evidence jurors will automatically find an expert from Harvard or Mayo Clinic more credible than one from the state university or a community hospital – and in some jurisdictions, jurors may actually prefer an expert from their state’s flagship university or hospital to one from a national elite.  Although jurors will certainly consider an expert’s pedigree and it may be influential, you can’t expect an expert’s credentials alone to carry the day for you.

In fact, we recently conducted a nationwide survey in which we asked jury-eligible participants which attributes they find most important in an expert witness.  Only 6 percent said having a famous employer (such as Harvard or Stanford) was one of the most important factors – the same number who chose how many accolades the expert has racked up in their field.

The research – both ours and others’ – shows being an effective teacher is a much more important trait for jurors evaluating experts’ credibility.  In our survey, 71 percent said the ability to explain things in simple terms is important to them, second only to relevant experience (75 percent).

Jurors often struggle to understand the complex technical information thrown at them during a trial, and they appreciate experts who – like the best teachers – approach them at their level and make complicated concepts easy to understand.  On the flip side, jurors are likely to reject or discredit testimony from a world-famous expert who does a poor job helping them understand the case.

That’s why it’s important to consider more than just credentials when you’re choosing your experts.  The ability to communicate simply and effectively with laypeople is often more important.

We can give you advice about selecting experts for your case, and we can even use our online survey technology to allow representative jurors to evaluate video of your experts.  Please contact Senior Vice President Claire Luna at 714-754-1010 or cluna@juryimpact.net to find out how we can help.