How to keep unreproducible neuroimaging evidence out of court: A case study in fMRI and psychopathy

Psychology Public Policy and Law 29 (1):1-18 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The amount of neuroimaging evidence introduced in courts continues to increase. Meanwhile, neuroimaging research is in the midst of a reproducibility crisis, as many published findings appear to be false positives. The problem is mostly due to small sample sizes, lack of direct replications, and questionable research practices. There are concerns that a significant proportion of neuroimaging evidence introduced in court may therefore be unreliable. Guidelines governing the admissibility of scientific evidence—Frye and Daubert—are not designed to weed out such data. We propose supplementing Frye and Daubert with minimal reproducibility criteria that allow judges to make informed admissibility decisions about neuroimaging research. To demonstrate how this could work, we subjected functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) findings on psychopathy—evidence that has been admitted in court—to a minimal reproducibility test. A systematic PRISMA search found 64 relevant studies but no sufficiently powered, directly replicated evidence of a psychopathy-related neurobiological profile. This illustrates two things: (a) the probability of false positives in this data set is likely to be unacceptably high and (b) the reproducibility of similar neuroimaging evidence can be evaluated in a straightforward way. Our findings suggest an urgent need to modify admissibility guidelines to exclude low-quality neuroimaging data.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,616

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Psychopathy: Neurohype and Its Consequences.Jarkko Jalava & Stephanie Griffiths - 2022 - In Luca Malatesti, John McMillan & Predrag Šustar (eds.), Psychopathy: Its Uses, Validity and Status. Cham: Springer. pp. 79-98.
A comprehensive neuroimaging review of PCL-R defined psychopathy.Stephanie Y. Griffiths & Jarkko V. Jalava - 2017 - Aggression and Violent Behavior:DOI: 10.1016/j.avb.2017.07.002.
Ethical and Legal Implications of the Methodological Crisis in Neuroimaging.Philipp Kellmeyer - 2017 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 26 (4):530-554.
Neurobiology, neuroimaging, and free will.Walter Glannon - 2005 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy 29 (1):68-82.
Psychopathy, Genes, and the Criminal Justice System.Paula Kim - 2014 - The Columbia Science and Technology Law Review 15:375-400.
Re-appraising Psychopathy.John McMillan - 2022 - In Luca Malatesti, John McMillan & Predrag Šustar (eds.), Psychopathy: Its Uses, Validity and Status. Cham: Springer. pp. 7-18.
Confirmation, Refutation, and the Evidence of fMRI.Christopher Mole & Colin Klein - 2010 - In Stephen Hanson & Martin Bunzl (eds.), Foundational Issues in Human Brain Mapping. Cambridge: MIT Press. pp. 99.
The value-ladenness of psychopathy.Marko Jurjako & Luca Malatesti - 2022 - In Luca Malatesti, John McMillan & Predrag Šustar (eds.), Psychopathy: Its Uses, Validity and Status. Cham: Springer. pp. 215-233.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-03-26

Downloads
32 (#431,738)

6 months
14 (#114,812)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Rasmus Rosenberg Larsen
University of Toronto at Mississauga

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations