Add to ORKGThis paper explores whether brain images may be admitted as evidence in criminal trials under Federal Rule of Evidence 403, which weighs probative value against the danger of being prejudicial, confusing, or misleading to fact finders. The paper summarizes and evaluates recent empirical research relevant to these issues. We argue that currently the probative value of neuroimages for criminal responsibility is minimal, and there is some evidence of their potential to be prejudicial or misleading. We also propose experiments that will directly assess how jurors are influenced by brain images
This article addresses the question of the relevance of brain imaging to legal criteria that are beh...
The robust neuroimaging debate has dealt mostly with philosophical questions about free will, respon...
Various neuroscientific techniques are increasingly being used in criminal courts causing a vivid de...
This paper explores whether brain images may be admitted as evidence in criminal trials under Federa...
Neurobiological evidence in the form of brain scans (MRI images, PET images, etc.) is being introduc...
This contribution to the Brain Sciences in the Courtroom Symposium identifies and discusses issues i...
Recent advances in brain imaging technologies allow researchers to peer inside a defendant\u27s br...
Advancements in technology have now made it possible for scientists to provide assessments of an ind...
It has become increasingly common for brain images to be proffered as evidence in civil and criminal...
Neuroimaging evidence should be restricted in terms of admissibility in the courts, and should only ...
It has become increasingly common for brain images to be proffered as evidence in criminal and civil...
This invited commentary for Journal of Law & the Biosciences considers four empirical studies previo...
As the United States continues to bear witness to high-profile episodes of police violence, many hav...
Much courtroom evidence relies on assessing witness memory. Recent advances in brain imaging analysi...
The admissibility of neuroscientific evidence is becoming an increasingly important issue for Americ...
This article addresses the question of the relevance of brain imaging to legal criteria that are beh...
The robust neuroimaging debate has dealt mostly with philosophical questions about free will, respon...
Various neuroscientific techniques are increasingly being used in criminal courts causing a vivid de...
This paper explores whether brain images may be admitted as evidence in criminal trials under Federa...
Neurobiological evidence in the form of brain scans (MRI images, PET images, etc.) is being introduc...
This contribution to the Brain Sciences in the Courtroom Symposium identifies and discusses issues i...
Recent advances in brain imaging technologies allow researchers to peer inside a defendant\u27s br...
Advancements in technology have now made it possible for scientists to provide assessments of an ind...
It has become increasingly common for brain images to be proffered as evidence in civil and criminal...
Neuroimaging evidence should be restricted in terms of admissibility in the courts, and should only ...
It has become increasingly common for brain images to be proffered as evidence in criminal and civil...
This invited commentary for Journal of Law & the Biosciences considers four empirical studies previo...
As the United States continues to bear witness to high-profile episodes of police violence, many hav...
Much courtroom evidence relies on assessing witness memory. Recent advances in brain imaging analysi...
The admissibility of neuroscientific evidence is becoming an increasingly important issue for Americ...
This article addresses the question of the relevance of brain imaging to legal criteria that are beh...
The robust neuroimaging debate has dealt mostly with philosophical questions about free will, respon...
Various neuroscientific techniques are increasingly being used in criminal courts causing a vivid de...