[W3] - Readings Flashcards
Freud’s three humiliations that mankind suffered
Cosmological: earth is not the center of the universe
Evolutionary: humans and apes are related
Psychological: humans only have limited control over their sexual drives and limited
conscious access to psychological processes
(the ego is not the master in its own house → popular idea in recent neuroscience
research)
Breaking down the genuine implications of Libet’s experiment
Libet’s experiment in the 1980s: conscious intention to press a button is preceded by
a READINESS POTENTIAL recorded from the premotor cortex. This
was interpreted as behavior being determined by processes over which we have no control.
However, brain areas observed as active in similar experiments were not those associated with unconscious biases, but with a network of high-level control areas and
lateral areas in the prefrontal cortex - associated with reasoning processes,
controlled decisions, and explicit rule application. So, are the determinants really unconscious?
Even Libet himself reported in that same paper that the readiness
potential can not be perceived as a strict cause of action, because an RP can occur WITHOUT an action being taken.
If all actions are caused by the unconscious, it would undermine our standing as rational agents. Legal responsibility assumes minimal rationality → diminished responsibility
follows from diminished rationality.
Pointing to experimental situations where our rationality fails, for example, because our actions
are influenced through unconscious manipulations in an irrational way, guarantees public attention
because such findings contradict our intuitions - but it does not undermine our notion of being rational agents, at least to a varying degree.
People who want to undermine the notion that
we are rational actors have to beware not to commit an irrational fallacy themselves - by
falling prey to a selection bias. That is, they must not only consider evidence undermining the
notion that we are rational actors, but also have to WEIGH THIS AGAINST evidence supporting the
contrary.
What did Damasio help to popularize and how?
The idea that
criminal behavior can be linked to focal lesions was popularized by Antonio Damasio and colleagues.
Gage and the overestimation of brain damage’s contribution
- Damaged ventromedial prefrontal cortex (VMPFC)
- Severe personality changes (to almost a psychopath) were reported [even though antisocial behavior was only referenced 20 years after injury]
- Initial doctor reports only made accessible recently.
- Gage suffered severe
infections, delirious from losing blood, fungus growth on wound and brain, psychological trauma and progressive damage from infection neglect. - Bigelow reported recovery in body and mind, besides losing his sight in one eye.
EVR and JZ - and the overestimation of brain damage’s contribution
EVR:
- Orbitofrontal meningioma surgically removed leading to loss of brain tissue.
- Severe social problems; lost his job, savings, wife
and children - and so dependent on others that he had to move in with his parents in his thirties -
“acquired sociopathy.”
JZ:
- Pituitary adenoma surgically removed from left
orbitofrontal/ventromedial cortex.
- Could no longer sustain a
stable work relationship, lost personal savings, and wife - suspicious, irresponsible, confabulating - antisocial personality disorder.
For neither of them there is no evidence of actual criminal behavior. Furthermore, as diagnostic criteria change, so does the interpretation whether these patients are “antisocial.”
The 40-year old teacher - and the overestimation of brain damage’s contribution
- Collected child porn, molested step-daughter, failed treatment because of soliciting sexual favors.
- Pain and fear of further inappropriate actions led to an MRI - huge tumor and cyst.
- Improved with removal, but recurred with tumor regrowth, then improved with removal again.
- More general problems than just pedophilia - may have been aware of the wrongness of his actions, and could resist them to a certain degree, minimally rational (limited capacity for self control).
Contrasting evidence for the consistent effects of brain damage
- Man who fell
on spiked iron gate, and wounded like Gage. - Became dependent on
others, incapable of planning, fulfilling responsibilities, and struggling managing money. Apathetic, lacked drive, occasionally restless
and impatient. - No problems in his relationship as he got married and had kids,
and a job. Never antisocial. - A different 33-year-old man who previously showed pathologic aggression and violent behavior became docile/indifferent and inappropriately cheerful after suicide.
- Damaged VMPFC with arrow through the brain.
- If damage to this area actually causes sociopathy, a different outcome would be expected.
In sum: while many patients had personal and social problems after their brain damage occurred,
these are NOT particularly criminal in nature. The VMPFC cannot be generally understood as a
seat of morality or appropriate behavior in the human brain.
The future of neuroscience in forensic science
Neuroscience may improve forensic science in the long run, but it’s far from overthrowing social
intuitions (especially free will problem).
There is NO strong evidence between damage to a particular brain area and antisocial or criminal behavior.
Premature application of neuroscience
in forensic context carries risk of false positives and negatives. Based on reflection of the two
examples of free will and “dangerous” brains, putting the evidence in a wider psychological and
social context, individual legal applications of neuroscience methods would be PREMATURE given the current state of knowledge!
Gage and the theoretical concepts of Neurodeterminism, Localizationism, and Neurorehabilitation
Neurodeterminism: That people’s behavior is primarily or solely determined by their
brain, not by their situation or environment.
Localizationism: That personality traits predisposing people to show certain behaviors
can be linked directly to identifiable areas in the brain.
Neurorehabilitation: That people can (at least partially) recover from brain damage,
enabled by neuroplasticity and a facilitating environment.
How to improve scientific communications about Phineas Gage
- Different historical sources should be mentioned
- It should be stated that evidence about personality change is scarce, circumstantial, and
controversial - It should be recognized that psychological trauma and physical disfigurement might have
played a role too, and that he suffered severe infection, fever, and coma after accident, as
well as progressive brain damage in the long run. - Gage’s (partial) recovery should be mentioned to give patients that presently suffer from
similar brain damage hope and to stimulate new developments in neurorehabilitation (Griggs - only half of textbooks mentioned this)
Raine and the LOMBROSO program
Males (18+) register for brain scan and DNA testing. If they are…
- LP-V: Lombroso Positive—Violence → 79% chance of committing a serious
violent offense. - LP-S → 82% chance of committing rape or pedophilic offenses.
- LP-H →51% chance of killing someone in the
next 5 years.
People who test positive (LPs) are held in indefinite detention (a home away from home); but have the right to be retested and challenge the findings.
Derived from the experimental criminology movement of 1998, some have argued that just as we screen for cancer to prevent deaths, we should also screen for violence to
prevent loss of life.
Extending LOMBROSO to younger ages with the National Child Screening Program (NCSP)
At 10, children are given a
comprehensive medical, psychological, social, and behavioral evaluation.
It’s a residential treatment program that should be
successful in cutting odds of criminal behavior by more than half. The child (“rotten apple”) will be taken away for two years for intensive biosocial therapy, but after that will be back home.
NCSP officials need to act ‘in loco parentis’––to step into the parents’ shoes.
Because bad parenting and genes can lead to violent behavior, adults should need to have a license before they can have a child → Parental License Act - A car can be a killer, so we need a license: why not the same for kids?
Raine’s view on the present: LOMBROSO could certainly come about in twenty years, or something quite like it – Indefinite imprisonment for dangerous criminal offenders––or
‘preventive detention,’ as it is neatly packaged––is common in many countries.
Buchman on Neurobiological Narratives - Mood disorders and neuroimaging
We still await functional neuroimaging - which could be used in the prediction, diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders. Its potential efficacy is controversial.
How do mentally ill people view functional neuroimaging and the potential impacts of its use?
Sample and methods: 12 interviews with adults with MDD or BPD.
Perspectives on FN and mitigating stigma:
* Would use brain scans to destigmatize their experience in the eyes of other people; as a concrete medical argument for disorder
* Reduction of social distance and fear of others
* If mental illnesses are brain diseases and
beyond control, then the stigma, blame and moral failing associated with them would decrease - Is this true though? Some studies show that genetic or biological underpinnings
actually increase stigma.
Perspectives on FN and morally loaded explanations of mental illness:
* Hope that a brain scan would point to imbalances that require correction by a pharmaceutical
* Chemical imbalance explanations led to decreased personal and moral responsibility for
depression, but a worsened prognosis and the belief that psychosocial interventions were
ineffective
* If an overly simple neurochemical explanation is presented to clients, they might
challenge its legitimacy
* Complex and sometimes seemingly contradictory ways in which people integrate notions
of a disordered brain into a concept of a self that at once has and is a brain.
Perspectives on FN and legitimizing psychiatric symptoms (via objective representations):
* Neuroimages represent snapshots of brain activity, imbued with the integrity
and validity of a photo.
* Neuroimage helps one find an ‘acknowledgement’ of their experience, grounded in a
powerful representation that bears the marks of transparency → acknowledging or
legitimizing effect, explanatory power
* Many participants used words such as ‘objective’ and ‘concrete’ to convey what a neuroimage of mental disorder offered.
Perspectives on FN making DSM categories more concrete:
*Controversial to move away from symptom-based criteria
* Many participants expressed a desire to know if their disorder could be seen in the brain
* Desire to use neuroimaging to find out if her brain was different
* Use of the neuroimage to arbitrate categories of normality implies an objective self.
Summarizing Buchman’s findings on neuroimaging perspectives amongst disordered participants
- Neuroimaging is akin to ‘the real thing’. Like the ‘neurorealism’ described by Racine et al. it
represents ‘a better, more objective, neutral technique’ to access truth than an individual’s
subjective reports; and it becomes ‘a core participant in the production of knowledge’. - Participants want to use a neuroimage to objectify subjective experience, rendering their
mental disorder biological, external, less blameworthy and less frightening to others - Concepts of mental disorder as brain disease can provide powerful justification for brain-based
interventions that might not otherwise provide a favorable balance of risks and benefits. - Analysis suggests that without a broader shift in attitudes, a neuroimage may FAIL to disentangle
mental illness from the moral judgments often attached to a diagnosis.
O’Connor & Joffe (2013) - How has neuroscience affected lay
understandings of personhood?
- While increasingly reported, often visually, not all of this information permeates public consciousness [17%
report ‘no awareness’ of neuroimaging, 47% ‘a little
aware’, 26% ‘quite aware’ and 10% ‘very aware] - Neuroscience has fostered a concept of the self based in biology in some cases (usually clinical populations) - when the person has been provoked to consider their “brainhood” by extrinsic events (e.g., diagnosis/medication)
- Free will is positively emotionally valenced, so people have been unreceptive to deterministic brain-based perspectives
on behavior (e.g., people fear dementia because it dissolves personal identity, independence and self-determination). Indeed, plasticity is a more popular concept, with reference to ‘boosting’ or ‘training’ one’s brain. - Patients expect biomedical explanations to reduce the stigma they encounter. However, the actual effect of neuroscientific explanations may be more complex. It reduces blame, but is also linked with social distance, perceived
dangerousness, fear, perceived unpredictability, and harsh treatment. They may also operate as “self-fulfilling prophecies”.
