The Intersection of Racism and Neuroscience Technology: A Cautionary Tale for the Criminal Legal System

IF 3.4 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Emily R. Perkins, Daniel E. Bradford, Edelyn Verona, Roy H. Hamilton, Keanan J. Joyner
{"title":"The Intersection of Racism and Neuroscience Technology: A Cautionary Tale for the Criminal Legal System","authors":"Emily R. Perkins, Daniel E. Bradford, Edelyn Verona, Roy H. Hamilton, Keanan J. Joyner","doi":"10.1177/23727322231196299","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Neuroscience evidence is appealing as a means to increase “objectivity” and reduce racial disparities in the criminal legal system. However, increasing reliance on defendants’ brain data may instead maintain racial disparities while rendering biases invisible. First, neurobiological data are not any more objective than traditional psychological measures. Second, the complexity and inaccessibility of neuroscience undermines public understanding of what such data can actually say. Third, existing methodologies have limitations when working with hair types and skin colors that are socially coded as Black; these phenotypic biases reduce both the reliability of individual data and the representativeness of comparison groups, skewing interpretations of defendants’ brain data. More research is needed before neuroscience evidence can be considered more probative than prejudicial.","PeriodicalId":52185,"journal":{"name":"Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23727322231196299","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Neuroscience evidence is appealing as a means to increase “objectivity” and reduce racial disparities in the criminal legal system. However, increasing reliance on defendants’ brain data may instead maintain racial disparities while rendering biases invisible. First, neurobiological data are not any more objective than traditional psychological measures. Second, the complexity and inaccessibility of neuroscience undermines public understanding of what such data can actually say. Third, existing methodologies have limitations when working with hair types and skin colors that are socially coded as Black; these phenotypic biases reduce both the reliability of individual data and the representativeness of comparison groups, skewing interpretations of defendants’ brain data. More research is needed before neuroscience evidence can be considered more probative than prejudicial.
种族主义与神经科学技术的交集:刑事法律体系的警世故事
神经科学证据作为一种增加“客观性”和减少刑事法律体系中种族差异的手段很有吸引力。然而,增加对被告大脑数据的依赖可能反而会维持种族差异,同时使偏见变得不可见。首先,神经生物学数据并不比传统的心理学测量更客观。其次,神经科学的复杂性和不可获取性削弱了公众对这些数据实际含义的理解。第三,现有的方法在处理被社会编码为黑色的头发类型和肤色时存在局限性;这些表型偏差降低了个体数据的可靠性和对照组的代表性,扭曲了对被告大脑数据的解释。在神经科学证据被认为是证据而非偏见之前,还需要进行更多的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences
Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences Social Sciences-Public Administration
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信