Daubert Vs Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals: Peer Review

1559 Words4 Pages

Question 1: Compare and contrast peer reviews and technical reviews.
Reviewers play a significant role in scholarly publications. Peer reviews support the validation of research, institutes a way by which it can be assessed, and increases interaction opportunities within research groups. Regardless of criticism, peer review is a commonly recognized technique for research authentication. A peer review is typically conducted by an experienced group of peers that share similar vested interest amongst the reviewers. The assigned peers perform reviews of appropriate rigor and detail of pertinent functional elements including examination of content, identification of issues that potentially hinder achievement of objectives, and recognize and correct …show more content…

Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Question 2: Identify one court decision that has influenced fire scene investigations, and briefly discuss specifically what it has affected.
One court decision that has influenced fire scene investigations was Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals. “In the case Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993), the Court placed the responsibility on a trial judge to ensure that expert testimony was not only relevant but also reliable” (Icove, De Haan, & Haynes, 2013, p. 19). With regards to scene investigations, the permissibility of expert science and professional opinions are currently more admissible in a court of law than in historical cases. The acceptance of fire investigation has placed more of the burden on professional testaments based on scientific facts rather than information that is simply experienced based. The Daubert criterion is a foundation for evaluating the permissibility of scientific expert testimony and includes testing, peer review and publication, error rates and professional standards, and general acceptance. The testability criterion decides if there is truth of falseness to the concept, method, or practice. Another phase of the Daubert criterion is to determine if the concept, method, or practice has been peer reviewed or publicized. The third stage includes identified error rates and professional standards and takes in account the compliance with current standards and the maintenance of those …show more content…

When an investigator works from a more broad-spectrum of information to more detailed information is often referred to as the “top-down” approach since investigators can begin at the top and start with a wide range of information and work their way down to a more specific assumption. It is possible to come to a reasonable conclusion even if all the evidences are not accurate. If the evidences are inaccurate, the conclusion may be logical, but it may also be false.

References
Icove, D. J., De Haan, J. D., & Haynes, G. A. (2013). Forensic fire scene reconstruction
(3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Question 4: Explain the development of working

Open Document