Skip to content

Daubert vs. Frye Admissibility Decision Workflow

Run the Daubert vs. Frye Workflow Fullscreen

About This MicroSim

Before a jury ever hears forensic evidence, a judge decides whether it is even allowed in. U.S. courts use one of two "gatekeeper" standards:

  • Frye (1923) asks a single question: is the method generally accepted in its field?
  • Daubert (1993) asks four questions: is it tested? peer-reviewed? does it have a known error rate? and is it accepted?

This MicroSim puts the same forensic technique through both standards at once, side by side, so you can see why the two tests sometimes reach different outcomes on identical evidence.

How to Use It

  1. Pick a technique from the dropdown (DNA, bite marks, polygraph, or probabilistic genotyping software).
  2. Press Next Step ▸ to reveal one gatekeeper question at a time on each tree. Each node turns green (met), yellow (disputed), or red (not met) for that technique.
  3. Hover any node to read what that gatekeeper question means.
  4. When both trees reach a RESULT, read the comparison panel at the bottom for the key difference.
  5. Press Reset or pick a new technique to compare another case.

What You Can Learn

  • Compare and contrast how Frye and Daubert evaluate the same evidence.
  • Attribute differences in outcome to the structure of each test (one acceptance question vs. four reliability factors).
  • Explain why a newer, validated method can pass Daubert yet fail Frye — and why a long-used but weakly tested method can do the opposite.

You can embed this MicroSim on your own web page with this iframe:

<iframe src="https://dmccreary.github.io/forensic-science/sims/daubert-frye-decision-workflow/main.html"
        width="100%" height="612" scrolling="no"></iframe>

Lesson Plan

Audience: High-school forensic science (grades 9–12) Time: 20–25 minutes Bloom level: Analyze (L4) — compare and contrast two standards.

Warm-up. Define admissibility and the role of a judge as "gatekeeper." Contrast the standard of proof at trial (beyond a reasonable doubt) with the threshold question of whether evidence gets in at all.

Compare-and-contrast task. Students step through all four techniques and fill in a 4×2 table: Technique · Frye outcome · Daubert outcome. Then they answer:

  • Which technique is admitted under both standards? (DNA STR profiling)
  • Which is excluded under both? (Polygraph — fittingly, the Frye case itself.)
  • For bite mark analysis, which Daubert factor exposes a weakness that Frye never checks? (Error rate.)

Argument writing. Each student picks one disputed technique and writes a short paragraph arguing for admission or exclusion, citing specific gatekeeper factors shown in the MicroSim.

References

Specification

This MicroSim was generated from a specification in Chapter 1: Foundations of Forensic Science and Legal Principles.