The role of the radiation safety specialist as witness: risk communication with attorneys, judges, and jurors.
As nuclear workers and members of the public continue to fear radiation in this litigious society, specialists in radiation safety will often be called upon as experts to explain the significance of radiation exposures or as fact witnesses to explain radiation safety practices. Radiation risk communication with attorneys, judges, and jurors presents special challenges to the communication skills of health physicists. Your role as the radiation specialist is to present testimony, either in the form of a deposition or as a trial witness, in a way that a judge or jury can understand. As a specialist in radiation safety, you will also need to educate the attorney that you work with so that he or she can ask the right questions and defend challenges in the case. The way that you communicate to attorneys, judges, and jurors could have a great impact on the case's outcome. As a radiation specialist, your testimony is not only to present the scientific basis for radiation health risks, but also to persuade the judge or jurors in the direction of the desired outcome of the case. Insights from the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator show that judges and jurors are most likely persuaded by "Sensing" language that is specific, detailed, measurable, and verifiable with their five senses. Thus, the conceptual, abstract, and theoretical "Intuitive" language often favored by radiation experts may not be understood or appreciated by a judge or jurors. They may also prefer the more personal, empathetic, and caring "Feeling" language rather than the impersonal, logical, and analytical "Thinking" language favored by health physicists. People's feelings about radiation risks are a big factor in radiation cases and providing testimony to address feeling-based conclusions requires a very different communication approach than normally used by health physicists. An understanding of language preferences can be crucial for effective communication with attorneys, judges, and jurors. These insights are derived from the author's experience as a communication specialist and as a radiation expert for the plaintiffs in two radon cases. This paper also provides insights into the qualifications for serving as an expert or fact witness, preparation for a trial, presenting testimony, the courtroom as drama, and the best language modes for persuasive communications with judges and jurors.
Johnson
R H
RH
Communication Science Institute, Inc, and CSI-Radiation Safety Academy, Gaithersburg, MD 20877, USA. rjohnson@radtrain.com
D003142:Communication; D005104:Expert Testimony; D006801:Humans; D011832:Radiation Injuries / Q000517:prevention & control*; D011835:Radiation Protection / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D018570:Risk Assessment; D017751:Safety Management / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D014481:United States