Article Figures & Data
Tables
Item Gender Frequency Reported (%) Significance Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Always Told fees are excessive Male 34.8 56.5 8.7 0.0 0.0 p = .010 Female 72.0 16.0 12.0 0.0 0.0 Felt adequately prepared to testify despite court's ruling against opinion Male 0.0 4.3 17.4 56.5 21.7 p = .040 Female 0.0 0.0 24.0 76.0 0.0 Feel confident in opinions Male 0.0 0.0 0.0 65.2 34.8 p = .033 Female 0.0 0.0 4.0 88.0 8.0 Feels case's desired outcome was due to expert's effective testimony Male 0.0 4.3 39.1 56.5 0.0 p = .001 Female 0.0 4.0 84.0 12.0 0.0 No Impact Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Impact of expert's testimony on case's outcome Male 0.0 4.3 39.1 56.5 p = .018 Female 0.0 0.0 76.0 24.0 Impact of academic productivity in selection of expert Male 0.0 73.9 26.1 0.0 p = .002 Female 12.0 28.0 40.0 20.0 Item Gender Frequency Reported (%) Significance Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Always Frequency of no anxiety before/during testimony Male 30.4 21.7 13.0 30.4 4.3 p = .056 Female 60.0 20.0 16.0 4.0 0.0 Improperly addressed (e.g., called Mr./Ms. instead of Dr.) Male 47.8 34.8 17.4 0.0 0.0 p = .058 Female 20.0 32.0 32.0 16.0 0.0 Felt adequately prepared to testify when courts ruled in agreement with expert's opinion Male 0.0 0.0 4.3 69.6 26.1 p = .071 Female 0.0 0.0 4.0 92.0 4.0 No Impact Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Impact of expert's experience on selection process Male 0.0 0.0 34.8 65.2 p = .082 Female 0.0 4.0 60.0 36.0 Impact of expert's gender on selection process Male 43.5 52.2 4.3 0.0 p = .085 Female 32.0 36.0 28.0 4.0 ↵* p > .05 and < .10.
Demographics Practice locale Age Race/ethnicity Professional title (MD, PhD) Years since completion of psychiatry/psychology training Fellowship experience Testimony experience Frequency of degrees of anxiety experienced before/during testimony Extreme anxiety High anxiety Moderate anxiety Mild anxiety Frequency of experiencing hassle factors Comments about age/appearance/attire Unrealistic time demands Not provided necessary information to form an opinion Not adequately prepared by attorney before testimony Hostile cross examination Provided with poorly organized/incomplete records Asked to adjust/reduce fees Pressured to adjust schedule to meet attorney's case needs Expected to obtain collateral data normally obtained by attorney Frequency of testimony-related thoughts “I provided effective expert witness testimony.” “I worked with effective attorneys.” “I felt confident in my testimony.” “After testifying, I spent time reviewing the strengths and weaknesses of my testimony.” “I enjoy testifying as an expert witness.” “I feel satisfied with my testimony.” “I am self-critical of my testimony.” “I have felt that a case's undesired outcome was due to my ineffective testimony.” “I have felt that a case's undesired outcome was due to ineffective counsel.” “I have felt that a case's desired outcome was due to effective counsel.” “I have felt that my testimony ‘helped’ a case.” “I have felt that my testimony ‘hurt’ a case.” “I tend to focus on the weaknesses of my testimony more than the strengths.” Opinions regarding traits affecting the selection of an expert witness Quality of expert's written reports Quality of expert's testimony Fees charged by expert Age of the expert Appearance of the expert Reputation of the expert Training of the expert
