Skip to main content

ASU Global menu

Skip to Content Report an accessibility problem ASU Home My ASU Colleges and Schools Sign In
Arizona State University Arizona State University
ASU Library KEEP

Main navigation

Home Browse Collections Share Your Work
Copyright Describe Your Materials File Formats Open Access Repository Practices Share Your Materials Terms of Deposit API Documentation
Skip to Content Report an accessibility problem ASU Home My ASU Colleges and Schools Sign In
  1. KEEP
  2. Theses and Dissertations
  3. ASU Electronic Theses and Dissertations
  4. Opposing experts, relative judgments and the reemergence of the neuroimage bias
  5. Full metadata

Opposing experts, relative judgments and the reemergence of the neuroimage bias

Full metadata

Description

There is conflicting evidence regarding whether a biasing effect of neuroscientific evidence exists. Early research warned of such bias, but more recent papers dispute such claims, with some suggesting a bias only occurs in situations of relative judgment, but not in situations of absolute judgment. The current studies examined the neuroimage bias within both criminal and civil court case contexts, specifically exploring if a bias is dependent on the context in which the neuroimage evidence is presented (i.e. a single expert vs. opposing experts). In the first experiment 408 participants read a criminal court case summary in which either one expert witness testified (absolute judgment) or two experts testified (relative judgment). The experts presented neurological evidence in the form of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data and the evidence type varied between a brain image and a graph. A neuroimage bias was found, in that jurors who were exposed to two experts were more punitive when the prosecution presented the image and less punitive when the defense did. In the second experiment 240 participants read a summary of a civil court case in which either a single expert witness testified or two experts testified. The experts presented fMRI data to support or refute a claim of chronic pain and the evidence type again varied between image and graph. The expected neuroimage bias was not found, in that jurors were more likely to find in favor of the plaintiff when either side proffered the image, but more likely to find for the defense when only graphs were offered by the experts. These findings suggest that the introduction of neuroimages as evidence may affect jurors punitiveness in criminal cases, as well as liability decisions in civil cases and overall serves to illustrate that the influence of neuroscientific information on legal decision makers is more complex than originally thought.

Date Created
2016
Contributors
  • Hafdahl, Riquel J (Author)
  • Schweitzer, Nicholas (Thesis advisor)
  • Salerno, Jessica (Committee member)
  • Neal, Tess (Committee member)
  • Arizona State University (Publisher)
Topical Subject
  • psychology
  • Social Psychology
  • Law
  • Juror Decision-making
  • neuroimage
  • Scientific Evidence
  • Law--Psychological aspects.
  • Brain--Imaging.
  • Jury--Decision making.
  • Jury
Resource Type
Text
Genre
Masters Thesis
Academic theses
Extent
vii, 66 pages : illustrations
Language
eng
Copyright Statement
In Copyright
Reuse Permissions
All Rights Reserved
Primary Member of
ASU Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Peer-reviewed
No
Open Access
No
Handle
https://hdl.handle.net/2286/R.I.40253
Statement of Responsibility
by Riquel J. Hafdahl
Description Source
Viewed on February 22, 2017
Level of coding
full
Note
Partial requirement for: M.S., Arizona State University, 2016
Note type
thesis
Includes bibliographical references (pages 31-32)
Note type
bibliography
Field of study: Psychology
System Created
  • 2016-10-12 02:17:55
System Modified
  • 2021-08-30 01:21:33
  •     
  • 1 year 5 months ago
Additional Formats
  • OAI Dublin Core
  • MODS XML

Quick actions

About this item

Overview
 Copy permalink

Explore this item

Explore Document

Share this content

Feedback

ASU University Technology Office Arizona State University.
KEEP

Contact Us

Repository Services
Home KEEP PRISM ASU Research Data Repository
Resources
Terms of Deposit Sharing Materials: ASU Digital Repository Guide Open Access at ASU

The ASU Library acknowledges the twenty-three Native Nations that have inhabited this land for centuries. Arizona State University's four campuses are located in the Salt River Valley on ancestral territories of Indigenous peoples, including the Akimel O’odham (Pima) and Pee Posh (Maricopa) Indian Communities, whose care and keeping of these lands allows us to be here today. ASU Library acknowledges the sovereignty of these nations and seeks to foster an environment of success and possibility for Native American students and patrons. We are advocates for the incorporation of Indigenous knowledge systems and research methodologies within contemporary library practice. ASU Library welcomes members of the Akimel O’odham and Pee Posh, and all Native nations to the Library.

Number one in the U.S. for innovation. ASU ahead of MIT and Stanford. - U.S. News and World Report, 8 years, 2016-2023
Maps and Locations Jobs Directory Contact ASU My ASU
Copyright and Trademark Accessibility Privacy Terms of Use Emergency COVID-19 Information