Interpreting Neuroscientific Evidence in the Legal Domain: Do the Stereotypes Come In?

IF 1.1 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, BIOLOGICAL
Chetan Sinha
{"title":"Interpreting Neuroscientific Evidence in the Legal Domain: Do the Stereotypes Come In?","authors":"Chetan Sinha","doi":"10.1007/s12124-024-09847-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The current article explores the meaning of neuroscientific evidence in the legal domain. It takes a social-psychological perspective to discuss how group-based stereotypes affect legal decision-making critically. Examining how any interpretation is anchored and objectified is interesting as evidence is interpreted in the context. Dominantly, with the ubiquity of neuroscience in different domains, the brain is positioned as an authentic source of nurturing authenticity. It is observed that sometimes unquestionable scientific knowledge may surpass the rationality and intuition of judges. In one way, it is a boon; in another, it is shaping the whole framework of our knowledge system, where knowledge from brain studies reifies our understanding of human actions and thinking.</p>","PeriodicalId":50356,"journal":{"name":"Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science","volume":" ","pages":"946-962"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-024-09847-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, BIOLOGICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The current article explores the meaning of neuroscientific evidence in the legal domain. It takes a social-psychological perspective to discuss how group-based stereotypes affect legal decision-making critically. Examining how any interpretation is anchored and objectified is interesting as evidence is interpreted in the context. Dominantly, with the ubiquity of neuroscience in different domains, the brain is positioned as an authentic source of nurturing authenticity. It is observed that sometimes unquestionable scientific knowledge may surpass the rationality and intuition of judges. In one way, it is a boon; in another, it is shaping the whole framework of our knowledge system, where knowledge from brain studies reifies our understanding of human actions and thinking.

解读法律领域的神经科学证据:刻板印象会影响我们吗?
本文探讨了神经科学证据在法律领域的意义。文章从社会心理学的角度探讨了基于群体的刻板印象是如何批判性地影响法律决策的。由于证据是在语境中被解释的,因此研究任何解释是如何被锚定和客观化是非常有趣的。主要的是,随着神经科学在不同领域的普及,大脑被定位为培育真实性的真实来源。据观察,有时不容置疑的科学知识可能会超越法官的理性和直觉。从某种意义上讲,这是一种福音;从另一个角度讲,它正在塑造我们知识体系的整体框架,来自大脑研究的知识重塑了我们对人类行为和思维的理解。
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
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
16.70%
发文量
66
期刊介绍: IPBS: Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science is an international interdisciplinary journal dedicated to the advancement of basic knowledge in the social and behavioral sciences. IPBS covers such topics as cultural nature of human conduct and its evolutionary history, anthropology, ethology, communication processes between people, and within-- as well as between-- societies. A special focus will be given to integration of perspectives of the social and biological sciences through theoretical models of epigenesis. It contains articles pertaining to theoretical integration of ideas, epistemology of social and biological sciences, and original empirical research articles of general scientific value. History of the social sciences is covered by IPBS in cases relevant for further development of theoretical perspectives and empirical elaborations within the social and biological sciences. IPBS has the goal of integrating knowledge from different areas into a new synthesis of universal social science—overcoming the post-modernist fragmentation of ideas of recent decades.
×
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