Coping with Cross-Examination and Other Pathways to Effective Testimony.

Stanley L. Brodsky American Psychological Association www.apa.org 240 pp., $29.95

Stanley Brodsky notes that "for all of the advantages that experts have over other witnesses, they too may be anxious in anticipation of testimony" and may approach their task with surprising trepidation, uncertainty, and confusion. What's more, despite--or perhaps because of--resumes several feet long, more than a few may secretly feel like professional imposters.

The forensic psychologist calls his new book, Coping with Cross-Examination and Other Pathways to Effective Testimony, a guide to "fearfulness on the stand and mastering that fear."

It is a self-help manual for the expert witness. Published by the American Psychological Association, the book is intended for all types of experts, but it no doubt will be judged most relevant for those who testify on mental health matters.

Brodsky certainly qualifies as the expert's expert. He testifies often, runs workshops for expert witnesses, and has written many books and articles in his field. This, his third guide for experts, draws on his own experiences in the courtroom, insights shared with him by other experts, and--occasionally--emerging research on the effectiveness of expert testimony.

It is eminently readable, although busy experts may disagree over whether Brodsky's folksy stories are worth the time; he sometimes wanders from his main point. Those who prefer their advice in a nutshell may profit from skimming quickly through the book's 52 short chapters, each starting with a pleasant drawing and ending with a summary maxim.

Coping with Cross-Examination discusses many dilemmas expert witnesses face--especially, but not exclusively, during cross-examination. For example, how should a witness respond to being bullied on the stand? What should one do when pressed tot a yes or no response if neither is the appropriate answer? What is the best way to counter a loaded question about whether more time for study might have produced more accurate testimony? And what should a witness do if the opposing expert is better known, better respected, or better paid?

The best answers to these and similar questions nearly always depend on the particular situation. But Brodsky's advice is sensible and will probably benefit prospective witnesses even if it only prompts them to think more effectively about the challenges they may encounter when testifying.

The author is at his best when he identifies traps that commonly ensnare forensic psychologists. How, for example, can one effectively explain, in terms a jury can grasp, what makes a good psychological test? How should the expert discuss such statistical concepts as interpreting hell curves so as not to confuse jurors?

When forensic psychologists appropriately base predictions on actuarial data, opposing attorneys may try to confuse jurors by posing a range of misleading questions.

For example, the lawyer might ask: "Don't your so-called actuarial statistics come from the violent behavior of persons other than Mr. Johnson? And isn't it fair to say that your results are based on statistical evidence regarding the behavior of other people?" Brodsky offers thoughtful suggestions on how to reply to many such questions.

Still, this hook falls prey to some faults common to many self-help volumes. Although sore e of the advice is insightful, other tidbits are unclear or difficult to translate into pragmatic steps. Many of the propositions come across as true under some circumstances but not others, or they may be true for some witnesses but not others. And some conclusions are tired cliches--for example, "Doing something often is not always the same as doing it well," "Do not be something you are not," and "High quality in expert methodology and opinions must be accompanied by effective delivery to make a difference."

Despite such occasional lapses into truism, this book will be helpful to expert witnesses on mental health matters. Experts in other areas may also find it useful.

Lawyers may wish to share it with the experts they hire, perhaps noting that it merits a quick read. Attorneys who cross-examine psychologists and psychiatrists may pick up more than a few pointers from the book.

NEIL J. KRESSEL, is a professor of psychology at William Paterson University in Wayne, New Jersey, and co-author of Stack and Sway: The New Science of Jury Consulting.