- Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Phone: (502) 597-5053
- Ph.D., Social Psychology, University of Nevada, Reno, 2005
- M.A., Social Psychology, University of Nevada, Reno, 2002
- Dyer, A., Found, B., Merlino, M.L., Pepe, A.L., Rogers, D.K., & Sita, J. (in press). Eye movement evaluation of signature forgeries: Insights to forensic expert evidence. In Horsley, M.E., B. Knight, & R. Reilley (Eds.)Current Trends in Eye Tracking Research.
- Merlino, M.L., Springer, V., & Sigillo, A. (2011). The social construction of the admissibility of most frequently-proffered varieties of expert testimony. In Epstein, J., and C. Henderson (Eds.) (pp. 1-20).The Future of Evidence: How Science and Technology will Change the Practice of Law. Chicago, IL: American Bar Association.
- Springer, V., & Merlino, M.L. (2011). 21st Century forensic education: Surveying lab director entry-level examiner requirements and attitudes regarding educational standards. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 56, 564-565.
- Domitrovich, S., Merlino, M.L., & Richardson, J.T. (2010). State trial judge use of court appointed experts: Survey results and comparisons. Jurimetrics Journal, 50, 371-390.
- Flores, D.M., Richardson, J.T., & Merlino, M.L. (2010). Examining the effects of the Daubert trilogy on expert evidence practices in federal civil court: An empirical analysis. Southern Illinois Law Journal , 34, 533-564.
- Merlino, M.L., & Springer, V. (2009). Context and controversy: Why questions of validity and reliability are seldom resolved in an adversarial setting. Tulsa Law Review, 45,133-145.Domitrovich, S., &Merlino, M.L.(2009). Neuroscience and the Law: Cutting edge issues for twenty-first century judges as gatekeepers. The Judge's Journal(48),19-22.Merlino, M.L.,Richardson, J.T., & Chamberlain, J. (2008).Science in the law school curriculum: A snapshot of the legal education landscape. Journal of Legal Education, 58,190-213.Merlino, M.L.,Springer, V., Kelly, J.S., Hammond, D., Sahota, E., & Haines, L. (2008).Meeting the challenges of the Dauberttrilogy: Refining and redefining the reliability of forensic evidence. Tulsa Law Review, 43(2), 417-445.Merlino, M.L., Murray, C.I., & Richardson, J.T. (2008). Judicial gate keeping and the social construction of the admissibility of expert testimony. Behavioral Sciences and the Law,26(2),187-206