The Frye standard, from a 1923 decision, asks whether the technique or methodology has gained general acceptance in the particular field to which it belongs. The inquiry focuses on consensus rather than on the judge's independent assessment of reliability.
It was displaced in federal court by Daubert in 1993 but remains the governing standard in a minority of states.
Alternative Names:
General Acceptance Test, Frye Test
Why it Matters?
The practical difference is what a challenge looks like. Under Frye, the fight is over whether a methodology is accepted in the field, which is often established by surveying literature and practitioners. Under Daubert, the judge evaluates reliability directly, opening more ground for attacking an accepted methodology poorly applied. Novel science is generally harder to admit under Frye; sloppy application of familiar science is easier to challenge under Daubert.
Frequently Confused with
Related terms
Frequently asked questions
Which is harder to satisfy, Frye or Daubert?
Do Frye states apply the test to all experts?
