|
Research Networks Network on Decision-making The third Network will focus on two kinds of decisions by medically normal individuals: (a) decisions that lead to criminal behavior and (b) decisions about criminal behavior by judges and jurors. (a) Decisions to Commit Crimes: While addiction or diminished brain function (the topics of the other two Networks) contribute to many criminal behaviors, many other criminal decisions flow from medically normal brains. The Network on Decision-making will look at such decisions from two main methodological perspectives. First, the Network will use neuroeconomics to explore criminal decision-making. Neuroeconomics studies human choices from the combined perspective of neuroscience, economics, and psychology – with special emphasis on how brains evaluate options, risks, and rewards in ways that influence choice. One line of research might focus on varying abilities to delay gratification. For example, existing brain imaging work shows different brain states associated with choosing a smaller immediate reward and choosing a larger but later one. By monitoring these states as experimental conditions change, experimenters can see when a person switches from choosing one to choosing the other. In an analogous way, experimenters could investigate the kinds and magnitudes of variables that prompt a person to switch from law-abiding choices to law-breaking choices. This would, in essence, explore temptation. Second, pervasive heuristics can yield systematic misapprehension of facts relevant to the choice of whether or not to engage in criminal behavior. Recent decades have seen an explosion of research and interest in behaviors seemingly inconsistent with the “rational actor” model of economics. Because some of these choices lead to criminal behavior, the Network on Decision-making will explore ways to integrate neuroscience with prior work exploring heuristics and biases in cognitive psychology, law and behavioral economics, and evolutionary analysis in law. (b) Decisions about Crimes: After criminals commit crimes, the legal system needs to make its own decisions about whom to arrest, how to manage a trial, whether to convict, and how much to punish. The Network on Decision-making will explore three key aspects of such decisions in the legal system. First, the Network will explore biases by using a combination of neuroscience and behavioral techniques. Biases may arise on the basis of race, sex, ethnicity, and the like. The Network will investigate potential ways to use neuroscience to detect biases in judges, juries, witnesses, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and police officers. One important aspect of this research will investigate the extent to which legal participants can accurately predict their ability to remain unbiased. Second, the Network on Decision-making will investigate how jurors react to different kinds of evidence. Some Rules of Evidence are designed to prevent the jury from hearing information that is true and relevant, but might also result in jurors over-reacting. These forms of evidence include, for example, graphic depictions of crime scenes, some kinds of “bad acts” the defendant did in the past, and character evidence (as well as, possibly, some neuroscientific evidence presented by impressive experts with flashy credentials). Such restrictions are based on neurological and behavioral assumptions that the Network will explore and critically evaluate. The Network will also use recent neuroscientific research on memory to compare the reliability of eyewitnesses with jurors’ reactions to eyewitness testimony. Finally, the Network on Decision-making will explore discretionary sentencing, particularly by investigating the neural correlates of judgments about how much punishment a criminal deserves. Existing behavioral research shows that people tend to endorse quite similar rankings of the blameworthiness of hypothetical criminals. Investigating this phenomenon with brain imaging techniques will provide a clearer window into how a sense of justice operates in judges and jurors. The following experts have tentatively agreed to serve as members of a MacArthur Network on Decision-making: Neuroscientists
|
