Walter P. Sinnott-Armstrong – författare

Psychopaths constitute less than 1% of the general population but over 20% of prison populations. They commit a disproportionate amount of crime and violence in society. Given that the economic burden of crime in the United States is estimated to be over $2.3 trillion per year, psychopaths likely constitute one of the most expensive mental health conditions known today. This volume chronicles the latest science of psychopathy and the various ways the condition intersects with the criminal justice system. From the modern techniques to assess the symptoms, to its utility in predicting violent recidivism, to the latest neuroscience youth and adults, and the most promising avenues for treatment, this volume captures the modern science of the condition and discusses ethical and legal issues surrounding psychopaths.

Psychopaths constitute less than 1% of the general population but over 20% of prison populations. They commit a disproportionate amount of crime and violence in society. Given that the economic burden of crime in the United States is estimated to be over $2.3 trillion per year, psychopaths likely constitute one of the most expensive mental health conditions known today. This volume chronicles the latest science of psychopathy and the various ways the condition intersects with the criminal justice system. From the modern techniques to assess the symptoms, to its utility in predicting violent recidivism, to the latest neuroscience youth and adults, and the most promising avenues for treatment, this volume captures the modern science of the condition and discusses ethical and legal issues surrounding psychopaths.

Many decisions in the legal system and elsewhere depend on predictions of bad behaviors, including crimes and mental illnesses. Some scientists have suggested recently that these predictions can become more accurate and useful if they are based in part on biological information, such as brain structure and function, genes, and hormones. The prospect of such bioprediction, however, raises serious concerns about errors and injustice. Can biological information significantly increase the accuracy of predictions of bad behavior? Will innocent or harmless people be mistakenly treated as if they were guilty or dangerous? Is it fair to keep people in prisons or mental institutions longer because of their biology? Will these new instruments of bioprediction be abused in practice within current institutions? Is bioprediction worth the cost? Do we want our government to use biology in this way? All of these scientific, legal, and ethical questions are discussed in this volume. The contributors are prominent neuroscientists, psychologists, sociologists, philosophers, ethicists, and legal scholars. This volume will interest everyone with hopes that bioprediction will solve problems or fears that bioprediction will be applied unjustly.

Many decisions in the legal system and elsewhere depend on predictions of bad behaviors, including crimes and mental illnesses. Some scientists have suggested recently that these predictions can become more accurate and useful if they are based in part on biological information, such as brain structure and function, genes, and hormones. The prospect of such bioprediction, however, raises serious concerns about errors and injustice. Can biological information significantly increase the accuracy of predictions of bad behavior? Will innocent or harmless people be mistakenly treated as if they were guilty or dangerous? Is it fair to keep people in prisons or mental institutions longer because of their biology? Will these new instruments of bioprediction be abused in practice within current institutions? Is bioprediction worth the cost? Do we want our government to use biology in this way? All of these scientific, legal, and ethical questions are discussed in this volume. The contributors are prominent neuroscientists, psychologists, sociologists, philosophers, ethicists, and legal scholars. This volume will interest everyone with hopes that bioprediction will solve problems or fears that bioprediction will be applied unjustly.

The legal system depends upon memory function in a number of critical ways, including the memories of victims, the memories of individuals who witness crimes or other critical events, the memories of investigators, lawyers, and judges engaged in the legal process, and the memories of jurors. How well memory works, how accurate it is, how it is affected by various aspects of the criminal justice system -- these are all important questions. But there are others as well: Can we tell when someone is reporting an accurate memory? Can we distinguish a true memory from a false one? Can memories be selectively enhanced, or erased? Are memories altered by emotion, by stress, by drugs? These questions and more are addressed by Memory and Law, which aims to present the current state of knowledge among cognitive and neural scientists about memory as applied to the law.