Thus, the language skills, experiences, and perspectives of jurors are crucial variables in determining the effects of the words that a witness speaks at trial, but they will not be the subject matter of evidence themselves. Therefore, evidence is not something produced at trial but instead the result of an interactive process between what is produced at trial and the jury. This view can support the argument that judges are never justified in excluding evidence, because they cannot accurately gauge how jurors will react to particular pieces of evidence. This basic conflict between the theory of judges and the theory of juries, and the underlying conflict as to whether truth is objective or emanates from human beings, also affects the decision of cases. Another area in which nonlegal perspectives are useful is that of the deliberative process. Psychological research on gender differences and research on group dynamics are both instructive here. Understanding of these and many other issues will be enhanced if we use tools from both law and other fields. 21 footnotes.