The Expert Expert Witness: More Maxims and Guidelines for Testifying in Court, Second Edition

For a book that the authors bill as the result of a meandering and leisurely collaboration, the second edition of The Expert Expert Witness: More Maxims and Guidelines for Testifying in Court is a great read. This book contains a collection of personal and professional observations from two of the most experienced and well published members of our field. This book has made significant changes since the first edition, which was written by Dr. Brodsky alone, including additional case examples, new chapters, and updated references. This overhauled edition is organized as 51 short “lessons” that draw upon social science, literature, pop culture, philosophy, psychology, psychiatry, and the law to help guide the expert through the strained relationship between medicine and the legal system. This book is reminiscent of a Vonnegut memoir, with its distinctive writing style that relies on the use of amusing anecdotes, thoughtful analysis, humor, and practical advice.

Despite the lack of clear topical transitions between chapters, the flow of the book is not interrupted and the unified voice of the authors effectively bound the reading experience. The chapter titles range from obscure, like “Holy Mackerel, Man!”, “Le Mot Juste,” and “To Faint, To Weep, To Black Out,” to clearly descriptive ones, such as “Recording of Assessments,” “Personal Attacks: Internet Vulnerabilities,” and “Ethics in Expert Testimony.” Throughout the book, the content reflects the authors' passion and enjoyment while simultaneously conveying their seriousness and professionalism.

One of the more thought-provoking chapters, “Social Construction of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Dangerousness,” addresses attacks to our diagnostic nosology. The authors use the examples of posttraumatic stress disorder and the assessment of dangerousness to illustrate how an attorney might challenge our opinions from a postmodernist and social constructionist perspective. The authors suggest several questions that opposing counsel may ask the expert, such as, “Are emotional numbing and emotional alienation necessarily the same thing? How are they different?” or “Who first developed this understanding about a disorder called posttraumatic stress disorder?” The book presents a taste of these types of questions as well as a brief background on the origin of these potential arguments. In sum, the authors suggest that, without some familiarity with the challenges of our work and a broad historical and scientific understanding of our accepted dogma, experts may find themselves struggling to construct a defensible response to such fundamental critiques.

Brief but illuminating, the chapter titled “Gotcha and Goodbye” does a particularly good job of explicating how lawyers exploit cognitive biases in ways that impact our work in the courtroom. To do this, the authors frame a cross-examination strategy within a psychological concept called the “peak-end rule.” This rule articulates that most people (i.e., possible jurists) formulate their conclusions in ways that draw heavily on the peak (the “gotcha”) and the end (the “goodbye”) of their experience. One of the defining studies of the existence of this rule was conducted by Daniel Kahneman in 2003, which evaluated how patient's overall perceptions of a colonoscopy varied based on the perception of pain intensity at the end of the procedure. In this study, the researchers randomized a group of patients receiving a screening colonoscopy and intentionally prolonged the procedure in a way that decreases discomfort for a short interval at the end of the colonoscopy. The group who received this technique, despite the increase in the length of the procedure, had a better perception of the experience as a whole and increased adherence for follow-up. How, one might ask, do lessons from this study apply to the courtroom? The authors not only demonstrate how attorneys utilize the peak-end rule in an effort to shape jury opinions with strong, assertive, and dismissive proclamations, but they also suggest strategies the expert can use to limit the impact of this technique.

The authors pepper chapters with equally useful and practical advice for courtroom experiences such as, the attorney's use of “illusory documentation,” fielding obtuse and confusing questions, weathering personal attacks, and correcting innuendo. I found that the vignettes accurately described many of the “testimony nightmares” that experts often confront. The suggestions throughout the book have the potential to settle the anxiety of experts and help them navigate their work in the courtroom feeling confident and prepared.

The introduction suggests that “the reader can start anywhere and stop anywhere with no loss of continuity,” and I found that guidance to be true. However, self-promoting as it may seem, the authors recommend reading their other books on testifying first, writing that this book picks up where the others have left off. In the spirit of full transparency, I strayed from following the author's advice and only looked at their other books after having finished this one. I would argue a different perspective though. I think that this book is well suited as a starting point for some learners. However, like both Brodsky's Testifying in Court and Gutheil's The Psychiatrist as the Expert Witness, this book is packed with thoughtful guidance for testifying experts of all levels. One criticism is that the layout and voice may not suit the intense, the neurotic, or the overly organized learner who may be hoping to find a foundational reference for their work as an expert. This book tends to speak to those who are open to reflecting on their testimony as a work-in-progress and are able to generalize, ponder, peruse, and appreciate learning at a leisurely pace. I think that it would be a wonderful addition to any forensic fellowship training, and it is both educational and enjoyable to read for seasoned and novice medical experts alike.

• © 2018 American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law