ClinicalTrials.gov
public full text
Public Domain
Biocriminology and the Adjudication of Criminal Responsibility: Is There a Consensus Among Scientists' Verdicts?
Because of the evolving nature of psychology research, non-scientists are more likely to struggle or misinterpret evidence regarding a person's psychological state. Misconceptions may thus be highly prevalent within the justice system, leading to negative consequences for people with psychological or neurobiological disorders. At the same time, no research has been conducted to compare the punishment perspectives of non-scientists, that typically make sentencing decisions, to scientists who possess a more advanced understanding of human biology and behavior.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Scientific Challenges to Free Will and Moral Responsibility#767583
- Economic decision-making in psychopathy: A comparison with ventromedial prefrontal lesion patients#745734
- Ethical Evidence#88465
- Carlos Nino's Consensual Theory of Punishment#71600
- Autonomous agency and the threat of social psychology#755999
Record · ID 1047365
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive