Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Behavior and Behavior Mechanisms Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Criminal law (4)
- Mental states (3)
- Neuroscience (3)
- Brain Overclaim Syndrome (2)
- Brain imaging (2)
-
- Compulsion (2)
- Criminal procedure (2)
- Culpability (2)
- Evidence (2)
- Excuse (2)
- Mitigation (2)
- Neurosciences (2)
- Sentencing (2)
- & social neuroscience (1)
- Addiction (1)
- Affective (1)
- Alteration of behaviors (1)
- Bail (1)
- Behavioral causation (1)
- Behavioral criteria of law (1)
- Behavioral prediction (1)
- Brain changes (1)
- Brain disease model (1)
- Capacity to change behavior (1)
- Causal theory of action (1)
- Choice (1)
- Cognitive (1)
- Cognitive Jurotherapy (1)
- Cognitive Pathology (1)
- Compatibilism (1)
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Behavior and Behavior Mechanisms
Neurohype And The Law: A Cautionary Tale, Stephen J. Morse
Neurohype And The Law: A Cautionary Tale, Stephen J. Morse
All Faculty Scholarship
This chapter suggests that for conceptual, empirical, and practical reasons, neuroscience in general and non-invasive brain imaging in particular are not likely to revolutionize the law and our conception of ourselves, but may make modest contributions to legal policy and case adjudication if the legal relevance of the science is properly understood.
Brief Of Amici Curiae Of 11 Addiction Experts In Support Of Appellee, Gene M. Heyman, Scott O. Lilienfeld, Stephen J. Morse, Sally L. Satel
Brief Of Amici Curiae Of 11 Addiction Experts In Support Of Appellee, Gene M. Heyman, Scott O. Lilienfeld, Stephen J. Morse, Sally L. Satel
All Faculty Scholarship
This brief is a critique of the brain disease model and many supposed implications of that model. It begins with a brief history of the model and moves to a discussion of the motivations behind the characterization of addiction as a “chronic and relapsing brain disease.” We follow with an enumeration of fallacious inferences based upon the brain disease model, including the very notion that addiction becomes a “brain disease” simply because it has neurobiological correlates. Regardless of whether addiction is labeled a brain disease, the real question, we contend, is whether the behavioral manifestations of addiction are unresponsive to …
Neuroscience In Forensic Contexts: Ethical Concerns, Stephen J. Morse
Neuroscience In Forensic Contexts: Ethical Concerns, Stephen J. Morse
All Faculty Scholarship
This is a chapter in a volume, Ethics Challenges in Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology Practice, edited by Ezra E. H. Griffith, M.D. and to be published by Columbia University Press. The chapter addresses whether the use of new neuroscience techniques, especially non-invasive functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and the data from studies employing them raise new ethical issues for forensic psychiatrists and psychologists. The implicit thesis throughout is that if the legal questions, the limits of the new techniques and the relevance of neuroscience to law are properly understood, no new ethical issues are raised. A major ethical lapse …
Actions Speak Louder Than Images: The Use Of Neuroscientific Evidence In Criminal Cases, Stephen J. Morse
Actions Speak Louder Than Images: The Use Of Neuroscientific Evidence In Criminal Cases, Stephen J. Morse
All Faculty Scholarship
This invited commentary for Journal of Law & the Biosciences considers four empirical studies previously published in the journal of the reception of neuroscientific evidence in criminal cases in the United States, Canada, England and Wales, and the Netherlands. There are conceded methodological problems with all, but the data are nonetheless instructive and suggestive. The thesis of the comment is that the courts are committing the same errors that have bedeviled the reception of psychiatric and psychological evidence. There is insufficient caution about the state of the science, and more importantly, there is insufficient understanding of the relevance of the …
Criminal Law And Common Sense: An Essay On The Perils And Promise Of Neuroscience, Stephen J. Morse
Criminal Law And Common Sense: An Essay On The Perils And Promise Of Neuroscience, Stephen J. Morse
All Faculty Scholarship
This article is based on the author’s Barrock Lecture in Criminal Law presented at the Marquette University Law School. The central thesis is that the folk psychology that underpins criminal responsibility is correct and that our commonsense understanding of agency and responsibility and the legitimacy of criminal justice generally are not imperiled by contemporary discoveries in the various sciences, including neuroscience and genetics. These sciences will not revolutionize criminal law, at least not anytime soon, and at most they may make modest contributions to legal doctrine, practice, and policy. Until there are conceptual or scientific breakthroughs, this is my story …
Neuroprediction: New Technology, Old Problems, Stephen J. Morse
Neuroprediction: New Technology, Old Problems, Stephen J. Morse
All Faculty Scholarship
Neuroprediction is the use of structural or functional brain or nervous system variables to make any type of prediction, including medical prognoses and behavioral forecasts, such as an indicator of future dangerous behavior. This commentary will focus on behavioral predictions, but the analysis applies to any context. The general thesis is that using neurovariables for prediction is a new technology, but that it raises no new ethical issues, at least for now. Only if neuroscience achieves the ability to “read” mental content will genuinely new ethical issues be raised, but that is not possible at present.
Brain Overclaim Syndrome And Criminal Responsibility: A Diagnostic Note, Stephen J. Morse
Brain Overclaim Syndrome And Criminal Responsibility: A Diagnostic Note, Stephen J. Morse
All Faculty Scholarship
This brief diagnostic note identifies a cognitive pathology, "Brain Overclaim Syndrome [BOS]," that often afflicts those inflamed by the fascinating new discoveries in the neurosciences. It begins by suggesting how one should think about the relation of neuroscience (or any other material explanation of human behavior) to criminal responsibility, distinguishing between internal and external critiques based on neuroscience. It then describes the signs and symptoms of BOS, the essential feature of which is to make claims about the implications of neuroscience for criminal responsibility that cannot be conceptually or empirically sustained. It then applies the diagnostic lens of BOS to …