Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Social and Behavioral Sciences
Moral Dilemma Judgment Revisited: A Loreta Analysis, Armando F. Rocha, Fábiot T. Rocha, Eduardo Massad
Moral Dilemma Judgment Revisited: A Loreta Analysis, Armando F. Rocha, Fábiot T. Rocha, Eduardo Massad
Armando F Rocha
Recent neuroscience investigations on moral judgment have provided useful information about how brain processes such complex decision making. All these studies so were fMRI investigations and therefore constrained by the poor resolution of this technique. Recent advances in electroencephalography (EEG) analysis provided by Low Resolution Tomogray (Loreta), Principal Component (PCA), Correlation and Regression Analysis improved EEG spatial resolution and make EEG a very useful technique in decision-making studies. Here, we reinvestigate previously fMRI study of personal (PD) and impersonal (ID) moral dilemma judgment, taking profit of these new EEG analysis improvements. Compared to the previous fMRI results, Loreta and PCA …
Putting The Trial Penalty On Trial, David S. Abrams
Putting The Trial Penalty On Trial, David S. Abrams
All Faculty Scholarship
The "trial penalty" is a concept widely accepted by all the major actors in the criminal justice system: defendants, prosecutors, defense attorneys, court employees, and judges. The notion is that defendants receive longer sentences at trial than they would have through plea bargain, often substantially longer. The concept is intuitive: longer sentences are necessary in order to induce settlements and without a high settlement rate it would be impossible for courts as currently structured to sustain their immense caseload. While intuitively appealing, this view of the trial penalty is completely at odds with economic prediction. Since both prosecutors and defendants …
Theoretical Underpinnings Of Jury Decision Making In Excuse Defense Cases, Christopher Sean Peters
Theoretical Underpinnings Of Jury Decision Making In Excuse Defense Cases, Christopher Sean Peters
Graduate Theses and Dissertations
In the typical criminal trial, a defendant is trying to prove he/she is not guilty because they were not the individual that committed the crime. However, another type of defense exists in which the defendant admits they were the culprit, but provides an excuse in an attempt to avoid criminal punishment. These so called "excuse defenses" include insanity, involuntary intoxication, age, and entrapment. In all cases, juries are required to determine whether the defendant had sufficient mental capacity to form the intent to commit the crime. Although jury decision making is a popular research area in psychology, relatively little has …