Expert opinions can be crucial tools in resolving disputes in civil cases where the burden of proof is “preponderance of the evidence,” or “more likely than not.” However, experts’ statements must be clearly stated and based on reliable facts and data. Furthermore, experts must be able to explain their methods and how they were formed. If not, judges can find their expert testimony to be inadmissible in a case.
The quality of expert opinion can be improved by a number of techniques. For example, experts should be well trained and experienced in the field of their expertise. They should also be willing to take the time to thoroughly analyze and research their work in a way that will result in a defensible and compelling opinion. Experts should avoid accepting cases with low budgets or tight deadlines because these will require them to cut corners in their analysis, which may make their opinions unreliable.
It’s also important to distinguish between different types of expert opinions. For example, an expert can offer an opinion based on their knowledge and experience, but this cannot substitute for the body of evidence reviewed through a systematic process by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). In the context of design, it’s often helpful for teams to seek out expert input to gain critical perspective from stakeholders and potential end users. However, teams should be careful to not ask experts to choose their preferred design option; doing so could short-circuit one of the most important learning objectives of a design process.