Refers to a 1993 US Supreme Court case, Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, which established who could be presented as an Expert in US courts. Under Daubert an expert’s proposed evidence must be
- Relevant to the issues at hand in the case (i.e., they cannot address non-issues);
- Reliable –
– i.e., whatever theory or tests the expert reports on must be testable, reproducible and verifiable
– Have a known or understood error rate and suitable procedures and standards to ensure quality control,
– Be known and accepted by others (peers) with expertise in the field (e.g., the scientific community).
It is the last ‘leg’ of reliability that is considered the most significant, i.e., peer acceptance of techniques or theories presented.