The Limits of Science: Explaining the Legitimation of Social Science in the Legal Field

• In Event: 464 - Regular Session. Law and Society II - Law, Expertise and the Interplay of Professions

Abstract

What explains the legitimation of social scientific knowledge in non-academic domains? Since the ‘70s, trial consultants—individuals who use social scientific knowledge and methods to consult attorneys during jury selection and other phases of criminal and civil trials—have become increasingly important actors in the legal field. Drawing from interviews with and fieldwork among attorneys, judges, and trial consultants, we identify competing logics surrounding the proper use of social science in the jury selection process (also known as “scientific jury selection”). Our findings suggest that the legitimation of social science with respect to the jury selection process is quite variegated—some attorneys think trial consultants and their expertise are of value, while others do not. By leveraging the variation in our case and by drawing on theoretical tools from organizational theory and the sociology of professions, we are able to identify factors that explain the legitimation of social science in our non-academic context, including the availability of resources, the demands of clients, and jurisdictional salience. Our findings fill an explanatory gap in the sociology of knowledge and science and technology studies literatures, while illuminating some of the processes that account for the reproduction of inequality in the criminal and civil justice system.

Authors

• Matthew Clair, Harvard University

• Alix Winter, Harvard University