Translational Application of a Neuro-Scientific Multi-Modal Approach Into Forensic Psychiatric Evaluation

Why and How

Bibliographic Data

ID15517217
AuthorsCristina Scarpazza (0000-0002-4126-426X, King's College London, corresponding author), Alessio Miolla (0000-0003-4427-185X, University of Padua), Ilaria Zampieri (IMT School for Advanced Studies Lucca), Giulia Melis (0000-0002-4699-021X, University of Padua), Giuseppe Sartori (0000-0002-6026-0133, University of Padua), Sandra Ferracuti (0000-0003-1150-1460, Sapienza University of Rome), Pietro Pietrini (0000-0002-6768-5556, IMT School for Advanced Studies Lucca)
Year2021
Volume12
Pages597918-597918
Publication date2021-02-05
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueFrontiers in Psychiatry (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1664-0640 • E-ISSN: 1664-0640
PublisherFrontiers Media (PUBLISHER • CH)
DOI10.3389/fpsyt.2021.597918
PMID33613339
OpenAlexW3128554988
LanguageEN
Citations received4
References cited117

A prominent body of literature indicates that insanity evaluations, which are intended to provide influential expert reports for judges to reach a decision " beyond any reasonable doubt ," suffer from a low inter-rater reliability. This paper reviews the limitations of the classical approach to insanity evaluation and the criticisms to the introduction of neuro-scientific approach in court. Here, we explain why in our opinion these criticisms, that seriously hamper the translational implementation of neuroscience into the forensic setting, do not survive scientific scrutiny. Moreover, we discuss how the neuro-scientific multimodal approach may improve the inter-rater reliability in insanity evaluation. Critically, neuroscience does not aim to introduce a brain-based concept of insanity. Indeed, criteria for responsibility and insanity are and should remain clinical. Rather, following the falsificationist approach and the convergence of evidence principle, the neuro-scientific multimodal approach is being proposed as a way to improve reliability of insanity evaluation and to mitigate the influence of cognitive biases on the formulation of insanity opinions, with the final aim to reduce errors and controversies

Engineering ethics · Insanity · Insanity defense · Neuroethics · Perspective (graphical · Political science · Psychiatry · Scrutiny · Computer Science · Deception detection and forensic psychology · Engineering · Law · Psychology · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment · Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending · Artificial Intelligence

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access