The Kelly-Frye standard of admissibility requires that a new scientific technique used by an expert witness in a child sexual abuse case be generally accepted within the relevant scientific community. The article traces the development of the Kelly-Frye standard, points out the confusions it has caused in the admissibility of psychological testimony, and analyzes conflicting decisions by California courts of appeal on the applicability of the Kelly-Frye standard to expert testimony in child sexual abuse cases. An alternative standard for the admissibility of expert testimony is proposed and compared with Kelly-Frye. The alternative provides a more coherent and predictable standard for testing the admissibility of expert testimony than does the Kelly-Frye standard. 412 footnotes.