Element contents
Series: Elements in Philosophy of Mind
Neurolaw
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 February 2024
Summary
Neurolaw is an area of interdisciplinary research on the meaning and implications of neuroscience for the law and legal practices. This Element addresses the potential contributions of neuroscience, and the brain sciences more generally, to criminal justice decision-making and policy. It distinguishes between three different areas and domains of investigation in neurolaw: assessment, intervention, and revision. The first concerns brain-based assessments, which may be used for predicting future violence, lie detection, judging legal insanity, and the like. The second concerns potential treatments and other interventions that aim at rehabilitating criminals and/or preventing crime before it occurs. The third investigates the ways that neuroscience may impact the law by changing or revising commonsense views about human nature and the causes of human action.
Information
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Series: Elements in Philosophy of MindOnline ISBN: 9781009271172Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 21 March 2024
References
Abrams, Z. (2022). The psychological science of adolescent behavior and decision-making is reshaping the juvenile justice system. Monitoring on Psychology 53(8): 48.Google Scholar
Aharoni, E., Abdulla, S., Allen, C. H., and Nagelhoffer, T.. (2022). Ethical implications of neurobiologically informed risk assessment for criminal justice decisions: A case for pragmatism. In Neuroscience and Philosophy, eds. Brigard, F. De and Sinnott-Armstrong, W., pp.161–193. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aharoni, E., Mallett, J., Vincent, G. M., et al. (2014). Predictive accuracy in the neuroprediction of rearrest. Social Neuroscience 9(4): 332–336.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aharoni, E., Vincent, G. M., Harenski, C. L., et al. (2013). Neuroprediction of future rearrest. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 110(15): 6223–6228.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alces, P. A. (2018). The Moral Conflict of Law and Neuroscience. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American Psychological Association. (2004). The polygraph in doubt: Because of the nature of deception, there is no good wat to validate the test for making judgments about criminal behavior. Monitor on Psychology 35(7): 71.Google Scholar
American Society for Addiction Medicine. (2017). Advancing Access to Addiction Medications. https://nosorh.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Access-to-MAT-by-state.pdf.Google Scholar
Anderson, N. E., and Kiehl, K. A.. (2014). Psychopathy: Developmental perspectives and their implications for treatment. Restorative Neurology Neuroscience 32(1): 103–117.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aono, D., Yaffe, G., and Kober, H.. (2019). Neuroscientific evidence in the courtroom: A review. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications 4(4): 1–20.Google ScholarPubMed
Aspinwall, L. G., Brown, T. R., and Tabery, J.. (2012). The double-edged sword: Does biomechanism increase or decrease judges’ sentencing of psychopaths? Science 337: 846–849.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Balaguer, M. (2009). Free Will as an Open Scientific Problem. Boston: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrow, R. L., and Fabing, H. D.. (1956). Epilepsy and Law: A Proposal for Legal Reform in the Light of Medical Progress. New York: Hoeber-Harper.Google Scholar
Bennett, C. (2023). Rethinking four criticisms of consequentialist theories of punishment. In The Palgrave Handbook on the Philosophy of Punishment, ed. Altman, M. C., pp.171–194. New York: Palgrave Macmillian.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bjornsson, G., and Pereboom, D.. (2014). Free will skepticism and bypassing. In Moral Psychology: Vol. 4, ed. Sinnott-Armstrong, W., pp. 142–157. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Blair, R. J. R., and Cipolotti, L.. (2000). Impaired social response reversal: A case of acquired sociopathy. Brain 123: 1122–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boggio, P. S., Villani, A. B., Zaghi, S., et al. (2010). Modulation of risk-taking in marijuana users by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Drug and Alcohol Dependency 112(3): 220–225.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bohm, D. (1952). A suggested interpretation of quantum theory in terms of “hibbed” variables, I and II. Physics Review 85(2): 166–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bomann-Larsen, L. (2011). Voluntary rehabilitation? On neurotechnological behavioral treatment, valid consent and (in)appropriate offers. Neuroethics 6(1): 65–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boonin, D. (2008). The Problem of Punishment. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burns, J. M., and Swerdlow, R. H.. (2003). Right orbitofrontal tumor with pedophilia systmptom and constructional apraxia sign. Archives of Neurology 60(3): 437–440.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caplan, A. (2006). Ethical issues surrounding forced, mandated, or coerced treatment. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 31(2): 117–120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caruso, G. D. (2012). Free Will and Consciousness: A Determinist Account of the Illusion of Free Will. Lanham, MD: Lexington Boos.Google Scholar
Caruso, G. D. (2016). Free will skepticism and criminal behavior: A public health-quarantine model. Southwestern Philosophical Review 32(1): 25–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caruso, G. D. (2017). Public Health and Safety: The Social Determinants of Health and Criminal Behavior. London: ResearchLinks Books.Google Scholar
Caruso, G. D. (2018). Skepticism about moral responsibility. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/skepticism-moral-responsibility/.Google Scholar
Caruso, G. D. (2020a). Justice without retribution: An epistemic argument against retributive criminal punishment. Neuroethics 13(1): 13–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caruso, G. D. (2020b). Abolish the case bail system. Arc Digital, October 9. https://medium.com/arc-digital/abolish-the-cash-bail-system-3cf6476ecaaeGoogle Scholar
Caruso, G. D. (2021a). Rejecting Retributivism: Free Will, Punishment, and Criminal Justice. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caruso, G. D. (2021b). Retributivism, free will skepticism, and the public health-quarantine model: Replies to Kennedy, Walen, Corrado, Sifferd, Pereboom, and Shaw. Journal of Legal Philosophy 46(2): 161–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caruso, G. D., and Morris, S. G.. (2017). Compatibilism and retributive desert moral responsibility: On what is of central philosophical and practical importance. Erkenntnis 82: 837–855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caruso, G. D., and Pereboom, D.. (2020). A non-punitive alternative to punishment. In Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy and Science of Punishment, eds. Focquaert, F., Waller, B., and Shaw, E., pp. 355–365. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caruso, G. D., and Pereboom, D.. (2022). Reconsidering Moral Responsibility. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caruso, J. P., and Sheehan, J. P.. (2017). Psychosurgery, ethics, and media: A history of Walter Freeman and lobotomy. Neurosurgical Focus 43(3): 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castelli, L., Perozzo, P., Zibetti, M., et al. (2006). Chronic deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus for Parkinson’s disease: Effects on cognition, mood, anxiety, and personality traits. European Neurology 55: 136–144.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Castelli, L., Perozzo, P., Caglio, M., et al. (2008). Does subthalamic nucleus for Parkinson’s disease: Effects on cognition, mood, anxiety, and personality traits. European Neurology 55: 136–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chisholm, R. (1964). Human freedom and the self. The Lindley Lecture. Reprinted in Free Will, ed. Watson, G., pp. 24–35. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Choy, O., Focquaert, F., and Raine, A.. (2020). Benign biological interventions to reduce offending. Neuroethics 13(1): 29–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choy, O., Raine, A., and Hamilton, R. H.. (2018). Stimulation of the prefrontal cortex reduces intentions to commit aggression: A randomized, double-blind, placebo- controlled, stratified, parallel-group trial. Journal of Neuroscience 38(29): 6505–6512.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clarke, R. (2003). Libertarian Accounts of Free Will. New York: Oxford Unversity Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, T. (2013). Clark comments on Dennett’s review of Against Moral Responsibility, Naturalism.org: www.naturalism.org/resources/book-reviews/exchange-on-wallers-against-moral-responsibility.Google Scholar
Cornell, D. G., Warren, J., Hawk, G., Staffoed, E., Oram, G., and Pine, D.. (1996). Psychopathy in instrumental and reactive violent offenders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 64(4): 783–790.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corrado, M. (2017). Punishment and the burden of proof. UNC Legal Studies Research Paper. SRRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2997654 or https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2997654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalkner, N., Unterrainer, H. F., Wood, G., et al. (2017). Short-term beneficial effects of 12 sessions of neurofeedback on avoidant personality accentuation in the treatment of alcohol use disorder. Frontiers of Psychology 8: 1688.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Darby, R. R., Horn, A., Cushman, F., and Fox, M. D.. (2017). Lesion network localization of criminal behavior. PNAS 115(3): 601–606.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davatzikos, C., Ruparel, K., Fan, Y., et al. (2005). Classifying spatial patterns of brain activity with machine learning methods: Application to lie detection. NeuroImage 28: 663–668.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Delfin, C., Krona, H., Andiné, P., et al. (2019). Prediction of recidivism in a long-term follow-up of forensic psychiatric patients: Incremental effects of neuroimaging data. PLoS One 14(5): e0217127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dennett, D. C., and Caruso, G. D.. (2021). Just Deserts: Debating Free Will. New York: Polity.Google Scholar
Denno, D. W. (2015). The myth of the double-edged sword: An empirical study of neuroscience evidence in criminal cases. Boston College Law Review 56(2): 493–551.Google Scholar
De Oliveira-Souza, R., Hare, R. D., Bramati, I. E., et al. (2008). Psychopathy as a disorder of the moral brain: Fronto temporo-limbic gray matter reductions demonstrated by vox-based morphometry. Neuroimage 40(3): 1202–1213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, T. (2014a). Criminal rehabilitation though medical intervention: Moral liability and the right to bodily integrity. Journal of Ethics 18: 101–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, T. (2014b). Blurred lines: Neurointerventions in crime prevention. The University of Otago Magazine. www.otago.ac.nz/otagomagazine/issue39/profiles/otago080465.html.Google Scholar
Douglas, T. (2019). Nonconsensual neurocorrectives and bodily integrity: A reply to Shaw and Barn. Journal of Ethics 12: 107.Google ScholarPubMed
Douglas, T., Bonte, P., Focquart, F., Devolder, K., and Sterckx, S.. (2013). Coercion, incarceration, and chemical castration: An argument from autonomy. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 10(3): 393–405.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Douglas, T., Pugh, J., Singh, I., Savulescu, J., and Fazel, S.. (2017). Risk assessment tools in criminal justice and forensic psychiatry: The need for better data. European Psychiatry: The Journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists 42: 134–137.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Du, Y. (2020). The application of neuroscience evidence on court sentencing decisions: Suggesting guideline for neuro-evidence. Seattle Journal for Social Justice 19(2): 493–523.Google Scholar
Ermer, E., Cope, L. M., Nyalakanti, P. K., Calhoun, V. D., and Kiehl, K. A.. (2011). Aberrant paralimbic gray matter in criminal psychopathy. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 121(3): 649–658.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farahany, N.A. (2016). Neuroscience and behavioral genetics in US criminal law: An empirical analysis. Journal of Law and Biosciences 2(3): 485–509.Google ScholarPubMed
Farahany, N. A. (2023). The Battle for Your Brain: Defending Your Right to Think Freely in the Age of Neurotechnology. New York: St. Martin Press, MacMillan.Google Scholar
Fecteau, S., Knoch, D., Fregni, F., et al. (2007). Diminished risk-taking behavior by modulating activity in the prefrontal cortex: A direct current stimulation study. Journal of Neuroscience 27(46): 12500–12505.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fedoroff, J. P., Wisner-Carlson, R., Dean, S., and Berlin, F. S.. (1992). Medroxy-progesterone acetate in the treatment of paraphilic sexual disorders: Rate of relapse in paraphilic men treated in long-term group psychotherapy with or without medroxy-progesterone acetate. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation 18(3–4): 109–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, J. M. (1994). The Metaphysics of Free Will: An Essay on Control. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Focquaert, F. (2014). Mandatory neurotechnological treatment: Ethical issues. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 35: 59–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Focquaert, F., and DeRidder, D.. (2009). Direct intervention in the brain: Ethical issues concerning personal identity. Journal of Ethics in Mental Health 4(2): 1–7.Google Scholar
Focquaert, F., and Erasmus, M. C.. (2015). Moral enhancement: Do means matter morally. Neuroethics 8: 139–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Focquaert, F., Glenn, A. L., and Raine, A.. (2013). Free will, responsibility, and the punishment of criminals. In The Future of Punishment, ed. Nadelhoffer, T. A., pp. 247–274. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Focquaert, F., Van Assche, K., and Sterckx, S.. (2020). Offering neurointerventions to offenders with cognitive-emotional impairments: Ethical and criminal justice aspects. In Neurointerventions and the Law, eds. Vincent, N. A., Nadelhoffer, T., and McCay, A., pp.127–148. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forsberg, L., and Douglas, T.. (2017). Anti-libidinal interventions in sex offenders: Medical or correctional? Medical Law Review 24(4): 453–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gamer, M. (2014). Mind reading using neuroimaging: Is this the future of deception detection? European Psychologist 19(3): 172–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ganis, G., Kosslyn, S. M., Stose, S., Thompson, W. L., and Yurgelum-Todd, D. A.. (2011). Lying in the scanner: Covert countermeasures disrupt deception detection by functional magnetic resonance imaging. NeuroImage 55: 312–319.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gkotsi, G. M., and Benaroyo, L.. (2012). Criminal offenders: Some ethical issues. Journal of Ethics in Mental Health 6: 1–7.Google Scholar
Glenn, A. L., Raine, A., Yaralian, P. S., and Yang, Y.. (2010). Increased volume of the striatum in psychopathic individuals. Biological Psychiatry 67: 52–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glenn, A. L., Yang, Y., and Raine, A.. (2012). Neuroimaging in psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder: Functional significance and neurodevelopmental hypothesis. In Neuroimaging in Forensic Psychiatry: From the Clinical to the Courtroom, ed. Simpson, J. R., pp.81–98. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grafton, S., Sinnott-Armstrong, W., Gazzaniga, S., and Gazzaniga, M.. (2006). Brain scans go legal. Scientific American 17: 30–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greely, H. T. (2007). Neuroscience and criminal justice: Not responsibility but treatment. University of Kansas Law Review 56(5): 1103–1138.Google Scholar
Greely, H. T. (2013). Neuroscience, mindreading, and the law. In A Primer on Criminal Law and Neuroscience, eds. Morse, S. J. and Roskies, A. L., pp. 120–149. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greely, H. T., and Farahany, N. A.. (2019). Neuroscience and the criminal justice system. Annual Review of Criminology 2: 451–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greely, H. T., and Illes, J.. (2007). Neuroscience-based lie detection: The urgent need for regulation. American Journal of Law and Medicine 33: 377–431.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Green, E., and Cahill, B. S.. (2012). Effects of neuroimaging evidence on mock juror decision making. Behavioral Science and Law 30(3): 280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, J., and Cohen, J.. (2004). For the law, neuroscience changes nothing and everything. Philosophical transactions: Biological Sciences 359(1451): 1775–1785.Google Scholar
Grove, W. M., and Meehl, P. E.. (1996). Comparative efficiency of informal (subjective, impressionistic) and formal (mechanical, algorithmic) prediction procedures: The clinical-statistical controversy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 2(2): 293–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grubin, D. (2018). The pharmacological treatment of sex offenders. In The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Forensic Neuroscience, eds. Beech, A. R., Carter, A. J., Mann, R. E., and Rothstein, P., pp. 703–724. New York: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, M. (2021a). Investigating algorithmic risk and race. UCLA Criminal Justice Law Review 5(1): 53–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, M. (2022b). Evaluating algorithmic risk assessment. New Criminal Law Review 24(2): 156–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hare, R. D., and McPherson, L. M.. (1984). Violent and aggressive behavior by criminal psychopaths. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 7: 35–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hemphill, J. F., Hare, R. D., and Wong, S.. (1998). Psychopathy and recidivism: A review. Legal Criminology and Psychology 3(1): 139–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirstein, W., Sifferd, K. L., and Fagan, T. K.. (2018). Responsible Brains: Neuroscience, Law and Human Culpability. New York: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houeto, J.-L., Mallet, L., Mesnaga, V., et al. (2006). Subthalamic stimulation in Parkinson disease: Behavior and social adaption. Archives of Neurology 63: 1090–1095.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hucker, S., Langevin, R., and Bain, J.. (1988). A double blind trial of sex drive reducing medication in pedophiles. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment 1(2): 227–242.Google Scholar
Jackson, J. (2009). Re-conceptualizing the right of silence as an effective fair trial standard. International Comparable Law Quarterly 58: 835–861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeppsson, S. (2021). Retributivism, justification and credence: The epistemic argument revisited. Neuroethics 14(2): 177–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kane, R. (2002). Some neglected pathways in the free will labyrinth. In The Oxford Handbook of Free Will, ed. Kane, R., pp.406–437. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kaplan, S. (2015). The execution of Ceil Clayton and the biology of blame. The Washington Post, March 18. www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/03/18/the-execution-of-cecil-clayton-and-the-biology-of-blame/.Google Scholar
Kiehl, K. A., Anderson, N. E., Aharoni, E., et al. (2018). Age of gray matters: Neuroprediction of recidivism. NeuroImage: Clinical 19: 813–823.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kozel, F. A., Johnson, K. A., Qiwen, M., et al. (2005). Detecting deception using functional magnetic resonance imaging. Biological Psychiatry 58: 605–613.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Langleben, D. D., Dattilo, F., and Guthei, T.. (2006). True lies: Delusions and lie-detection technology. Journal of Psychiatry Law 34: 351–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laura, and Arnold Foundation, John. (2013). Developing A Notional Model for Pretrial Risk Assessment. https://craftmediabucket.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/PDFs/LJAF-research-summary_PSA-Court_4_1.pdf.Google Scholar
Lemos, J. (2018). A Pragmatic Approach to Libertarian Free Will. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leutgeb, V., Leitner, M., Wabnegger, A., et al. (2015). Brain abnormalities in high-risk violence offenders and their association with psychopathic traits and criminal recidivism. Neuroscience 12(308): 194–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, N. (2005). Libet’s impossible demand. Journal of Consciousness Studies 12(1): 67–76.Google Scholar
Levy, N. (2007). Neuroethics: Challenges for the 21st Century. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, N. (2011). Hard Luck: How Luck Undermines Free Will and Moral Responsibility. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, P. T. (2016). Quantum Ontology: A Guide to the Metaphysics of Quantum Mechanics. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Libet, B. (1985). Unconscious cerebral initiation and the role of conscious will in voluntary action. Behavioral and Brain Science 8: 529–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Libet, B. (1999). Do we have free will? Journal of Consciousness Studies 6(8–9): 47–57.Google Scholar
Libet, B., Gleason, C. A., Wright, E. W., and Pearl, D. K.. (1983). Time of conscious intention to act in relation to onset of cerebral activity (readiness-potential): The unconscious initiation of a freely voluntary act. Brain 106: 623–642.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maletzky, B. M., Tolan, A., and McFarland, B.. (2006). The Oregon depo-provera program: A five-year follow-up. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment 18(3): 303–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, G., and Johnson, C. L.. (2005). The boys totem town neurofeedback project: A pilot study of EEG biofeedback with incarcerated juvenile felons. Journal of Neurotherapy 9(3): 71–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCay, A. (2022). Neurotechnology, law and the legal profession. Horizon Report for the Law Society, August: 1–29. www.scottishlegal.com/uploads/Neurotechnology-law-and-the-legal-profession-full-report-Aug-2022.pdf.Google Scholar
McGirr, A., Van den Eynde, F., Chachamovich, E., M. Fleck, M. Berlim. (2014). Personality dimensions and deep repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulations (DTMS) for treatment-resistant depression: A pilot trial on five-factor prediction of antidepressant response. Neuroscience Letters 563: 144–148.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meixner, J. B. (2016). The use of neuroscience evidence in criminal proceedings. Journal of Law and the Biosciences 3(2): 330–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mele, A. (2017). Aspects of Agency: Decisions, Abilities, Explanations, and Free Will. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, B., Byrne, M. K., Collier, C. H., et al. (2015). Baseline omega-3 index correlates with aggressive and attention deficit disorder behaviours in adult prisoners. PLoS One 10(3): e0120220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meynen, G. (2014). Neurolaw: Neuroscience, ethics, and law. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 17: 819–829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morse, S. J. (2005). Brain overclaim syndrome and criminal responsibility: A diagnostic note. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law 3: 397–412.Google Scholar
Morse, S. J. (2013). Common criminal law compatibilism. In Neuroscience and Legal Responsibility, ed. Vincent, N. A., pp. 27–52. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morse, S. J. (2015). Criminal law and common sense: An essay on the perils and promise of neuroscience. Marquette Law Review 99: 39–72.Google Scholar
Morse, S. J. (2018). The neuroscience non-challenge to meaning, morals, and purpose. In Neuroexistentialism: Meaning, Morals, and Purpose in the Age of Neuroscience, eds. Caruso, G. D. and Flanagan, O., pp. 333–358. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Morse, S. J., and Roskies, A. L.. (eds.) (2013). A Primer on Criminal Law and Neuroscience: A Contribution of the Law and Neuroscience Project. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moser, D. J., Arndt, S., Kanz, J. E., et al. (2004). Coercion and informed consent in research involving prisoners. Comprehensive Psychiatry 45(1): 1–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nadelhoffer, T., Bibas, S., Grafton, S., et al. (2012). Neuroprediction, violence, and the law: Setting the stage. Neuroethics 5(1): 67–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nahmias, E. (2011). Intuitions about free will, determinism, and bypassing. In The Oxford Handbook of Free Will, 2nd ed., ed. Kane, R., pp.555–576. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
National Institute of Drug Abuse. (2021). Medications to Treat Opioid Use Disorder: Research Report. https://nida.nih.gov/download/21349/medications-to-treat-opioid-use-disorder-research-report.pdf?v=99088f7584dac93ddcfa98648065bfbe.Google Scholar
Pardo, M. S., and Patterson, D.. (2013). Minds, Brains, and Law: The Conceptual Foundations of Law and Neuroscience. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pereboom, D. (2001). Living without Free Will. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pereboom, D. (2014). Free Will, Agency, and Meaning in Life. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pereboom, D. (2021). Wrongdoing and the Moral Emotions. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pereboom, D., and Caruso, G. D.. (2018). Hard-incompatibilist existentialism: Neuroscience, punishment, and meaning in life. In Neuroexistentialism: Meaning, Morals, and Purpose in the Age of Neuroscience, eds. Caruso, G. D. and Flanagan, O., pp.193–222. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Philipp-Wiegmann, F., Rosler, M., Romer, K. D., et al. (2011). Reducing cortical inhibition in violent offenders: A study with transcranial magnetic stimulation. Neuropsychobiology 64(2): 86–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Porter, S., Birt, A., and Boer, D. P.. (2001). Investigation of the criminal and conditional release profiles of Canadian federal offenders as a function of psychopathy and age. Law and Human Behavior 25(6): 647–661.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Porter, S., Brinke, L., and Wilson, K.. (2009). Profiles and conditional release performance of psychopathic and non-psychopathic sexual offenders. Legal Criminology and Psychology 14(1): 109–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poythress, N. G., Petrila, J., McGaha, A., and Boothroyd, R.. (2002). Perceived coercion and procedural justice in the Broward mental health court. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 25(5): 517–533.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pugh, J., and Douglas, T.. (2017). Neurointerventions as criminal rehabilitation: An ethical review. In Routledge Handbook of Criminal Justice Ethics, eds. Jacobs, J. and Jackson, J., pp.95–109. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Quirk, D.A. (1995). Composite biofeedback conditioning and dangerous offenders. Journal of Neurotherapy 1(2): 44–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raine, A. (2014). The Anatomy of Violence: The Biological Roots of Crime. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
Raine, A., Lencz, T., Bihrle, S., LaCasse, L., and Colletti, P.. (2000). Reduced prefrontal gray matter volume and reduced autonomic activity in antisocial personality disorder. Archives of General Psychiatry 57: 119–127.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raine, A., Portnoy, J. H., Liu, J. H., Mahoomed, T., and Hibben, J. R.. (2015). Reduction in the behavior problems with omga-3 supplements in children aged 8–16 years: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, stratified, parallel-group trial. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 56(5): 509–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raymond, J., Varney, C., Parkinson, L. A., and Gruzelier, J. H.. (2005). The effects of alpha/theta neurofeedback on personality and mood. Cognitive Brain Research 23: 287–282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Redlich, A. D., Hoover, S., Summers, A., Steadman, H. J.. (2010). Enrollment in mental health courts: Voluntariness, knowingness, and adjudicative competence. Law and Human Behavior 34(2): 91–104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rice, M. E., and Harris, G. T.. (2003). The size and sign of treatment effects in sex offender therapy. Sexually Coercive Behavior: Understanding and Management 989: 428–440.Google ScholarPubMed
Rigg, J. (2002). Measures of perceived coercion in prison treatment settings. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 25(5): 473–490.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Romero-Martinez, A., Bressanutti, S., and Moya-Albiol, L.. (2020). A systematic review of the effectiveness of non-invasive brain stimulation techniques to reduce violence proneness by interfering in anger and irritability. Journal of Clinical Medicine 9(3): 882–903.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ryberg, J. (2019). Neurointerventions, Crime and Punishment: Ethical Considerations. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roskies, A. (2021). Neuroethics. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Substantive revisions, March 3, 2021. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/neuroethics/Google Scholar
Roth, M. (2018). Philosophical Foundations of Neurolaw. Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Rusconi, E., and Mitchener-Nissen, T.. (2013). Prospects of functional magnetic resonance imaging as lie detector. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 7: 1–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rushing, S. E. (2014), The admissibility of brain scans in criminal trials: The case of positron emission tomography. Court Review 50: 62–69.Google Scholar
Ryberg, J. (2019). Neurointerventions, Crime, and Punishment. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sajous-Turner, A., Anderson, N. E., Widdows, M., et. al. (2020). Aberrant brain gray matter in murderers. Brain Imaging and Behavior 14(5): 2050–2061.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salekin, R. T., Rogers, R., and Sewell, K. W.. (1996). A review and meta-analysis of the psychopathy checklist and psychopathy checklist-revised: Predictive validity of dangerousness. Clinical Psychological Sciences 3(3): 203–215.Google Scholar
Shaw, E. (2014). Free Will, Punishment, and Criminal Responsibility. Dissertation Thesis. Edinburgh University.Google Scholar
Shaw, E. (2018a). Retributivism and the moral enhancement of criminals through brain interventions. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 83: 251–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, E. (2018b). Against the mandatory use of neurointerventions in criminal sentencing. In Treatment for Crime: Philosophical Essays on Neurointerventions in Criminal Justice, eds. Birks, D. and Douglas, T., pp. 321–337. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Shaw, E. (2019). The right to bodily integrity and the rehabilitation of offenders through medical interventions: A reply to Thomas Douglas. Neuroethics 12: 97–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, E. (2022). Neuroscience, criminal sentencing, and human rights. William and Mary Law Review 63: 1409–1443.Google Scholar
Shen, F. X. (2016). The overlooked history of neurolaw. Fordham Law Review 85(2): 667–695.Google Scholar
Sifferd, K. L. (2020). Chemical castration as punishment. In Neuro-Interventions and the Law, eds. Nadelhoffer, T. and Vincent, N. A., pp. 513–533. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Simpson, J. (2008). Functional MRI lie detection: Too good to be true? Journal of American Academy of Psychiatry Law 36: 491–498.Google ScholarPubMed
Smith, P. N., and Sams, M. W.. (2005). Neurofeedback with juvenile offenders: A pilot study in the use of QEEG-based and anlog-based remedial neurofeedback training. Journal of Neurotherapy 9(3): 97–99.Google Scholar
Soon, C. S., Brass, M., Heinze, H.-J., and Haynes, J.-D.. (2008). Unconscious determinants of free decisions in the human brain. Nature Neuroscience 11(5): 543–545.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steinberg, L., and Scott, E. S.. (2003). Less guilty by reason of adolescence: Developmental immaturity, diminished responsibility, and the juvenile death penalty. American Psychologist 58(12): 1009–1018.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Straiton, J, and Lake, F.. (2021). Inside the brain of a killer: The ethics of neuroimaging in a criminal conviction. BioTechniques 70(2): 69–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strawson, G. (1994). The impossibility of moral responsibility. Philosophical Studies 75(1): 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, J. Sherrod, Harp, J. A., and Elliot, T.. (1991). Neuropsychologists and neurolawyers. Neuropsychology 5(4): 293–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taxman, F. S. (2018). The partially clothed emperor: Evidence-based practices. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 34(97): 97–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tiihonen, J., Rossi, R., Laakso, M., et al. (2008). Brain anatomy of persistent violent offenders: More rather than less. Psychiatric Research and Neuroimaging 163(3): 201–212.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
To, W. T., Eroh, J., Hart, J., and Vanneste, S.. (2018). Exploring the effects of anodal and cathodal high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation targeting the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex. Scientific Reports 8(1): 4454.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
US Congress Office of Technology Assessment. (1983). Scientific Validity of Polygraph Testing: A Research Review and Evaluation. Washington, DC: US Congress, Office of Technology Assessment.Google Scholar
Vaidman, L. (2014). Quantum theory and determinism. Quantum Studies: Mathematics and Foundations 1: 5–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vargas, M. (2007). Revision. In Four Views on Free Will, eds. Fischer, J. M., Kane, R., Pereboom, D., and Vargas, M., pp.126–165. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Vilhauer, B. (2009). Free will and reasonable doubt. American Philosophical Quarterly 46(2): 131–140.Google Scholar
Vilhauer, B. (2012). Taking free will skepticism seriously. The Philosophical Quarterly 62(249): 8333–8852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vincent, N. (2013). Law and neuroscience: Historical context. In Neuroscience and Legal Responsibility, ed. Vincent, N., pp.1–24. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vincent, N. (2014). Neurolaw and direct brain interventions. Criminal Law and Philosophy 8: 43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vincent, N., Nadelhoffer, T., and McCay, A. (eds.) (2020). Neurointerventions and the Law: Regulating Human Mental Capacity. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wegner, D. M. (2002). The Illusion of Conscious Will. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wertheimer, A., and Miller, F.. (2014). There are (still) no coercive offers. Journal of Medical Ethics 40(9): 592–593.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xie, S., Berryessa, C. M., and Focquaert, F.. (2022). The impact of Neuromorality on punishment: Retribution or rehabilitation. In The Palgrave Handbook on the Philosophy of Punishment, ed. Altman, M., pp. 441–464. London: Palgrave MaMillan.Google Scholar
Yang, M., Wong, S. C. P., and Coid, J.. (2010). The efficacy of violence prediction: A meta-analytic comparison of nine risk assessment tools. Psychological Bulletin 136: 740–767.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yang, Y., and Raine, A.. (2009). Prefrontal structural and functional brain imagining findings in antisocial violence and psychopathic individuals: A meta-analysis. Psychiatry Research Neuroimaging 174(2): 81–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Accessibility standard: Unknown
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
Accessibility compliance for the HTML of this element is currently unknown
and may be updated in the future.
- 11
- Cited by