Download Law Schools- Are you interested in social science courses? In the

Law Schools- Are you interested in social science courses?
In the social sciences, we often bemoan the courts’ reluctance to incorporate our research and expertise
to enact positive legal reforms. For example, in criminal cases, many jurisdictions prohibit expert
testimony on eyewitness evidence, despite decades of research establishing (1) the fallibility of memory
and (2) that jurors’ lack knowledge on factors that affect eyewitness memory accuracy. In both criminal
and civil cases, many jurisdictions instruct jurors to consider the confidence on an eyewitness when
evaluating the veracity of his/her testimony, despite decades of research illustrating that confidence is
at best, a weak predictor of accuracy. But instead of remaining frustrated by the difficulty of integrating
ourselves within the legal system, it would better serve social scientists to understand the roots of
courts’ reluctance. There are several reasons why courts are often unwilling to integrate social scientists
and their research into the legal process (for either informational or improvement purposes)-- but for
the sake of brevity, I will focus on a single reason.
In my humble opinion, the biggest reason for courts’ reluctance is their lack of training in the social
sciences. Frankly, many judges and attorneys simply don’t understand our research, or the scientific
method that comprises the foundation of our research. Margaret Bull Kovera and colleagues have
conducted a series of research studies that established legal officials’ failure to identify basic flaws in
research, such as control groups. When faced with decisions about the admissibility of expert
testimony, the “judge as gatekeeper” approach is currently broken. Therefore, admissibility decisions
may appear cumbersome and overwhelming to a judge who lacks knowledge in the social sciences.
How can we solve this problem? While many solutions may come to mind, I would argue that the most
proactive and long-term solution is to train law students in the scientific method and relevant research
that will inform and improve the legal system. That way, our future judges can understand the scientific
method to assist them in their gatekeeper role over evidence admissibility. Our future criminal (and yes,
civil) lawyers can learn how to use social science to better represent their clients in the areas of
eyewitness memory, investigative interviewing, false confessions, police lineups, etc. And finally, and
arguably most importantly, policy makers will be armed with this important scientific information
Yet, very few law schools directly incorporate social scientific research within their curriculum. It is
interesting to note, however, that the law schools who do train their law students in the social sciences
are of high regard: the University of Southern California, University of Illinois, and Columbia University,
to name a few on this short list. If law schools are serious about providing their students with a wellrounded legal education that also gives them the skills to become successful practicing lawyers, I highly
recommend considering social science coursework. And it’s not necessary to create an entire program,
but at least a course or several that introduces law students to the social sciences and its methods.