The Use of Brain Imaging in High Stakes Decision Making: Law, Admissions, & Hiring
The 1997 film, Gattaca, depicts a stark future in which people are genetically analyzed at birth and given a path in life derived from the results. This exacting, perceivably pervasive use of science and metrics in decision making, especially with decisions that we associate with the use of morality or ‘the human element,’ often challenges our perception of ourselves and our ability to arrive at what is ‘right.’ ‘Neuroprediction of future rearrest’, primarily written by Eyal Aharoni, describes a series of experiments which aimed to study the relation of activity in the Anterior Cingulate Cortex (ACC), a part of the brain associated with the the inhibition process, to the risk of rearrest among adult offenders. The study found that, indeed, there is a strong inverse relation between the activity in the ACC and the rate of rearrest. A second paper, ‘Extraneous factors in judicial decisions’, studied a group of penal judges to determine if something as seemingly trivial as taking a food-break could influence the decision making of the judges. …show more content…
The study finds that even when taking other factors into consideration, a judge’s decision making is not consistent throughout the day and is highly dependent on something as arbitrary as when they ate. The biggest take away from that study is that even regardless of how judges’ personal views, experiences, and intentions affects their decisions, something as trivial as when they eat affects their decision making process. Therefore, by relying more on scientific indicators such as brain scanning of the ACC and less on the mercurial judgement of judges, courtrooms can both provide a more consistent and, consequently, fair judging for offenders while reducing the the rate of risky behavior committed by paroled
The 1997 film, Gattaca, depicts a stark future in which people are genetically analyzed at birth and given a path in life derived from the results. This exacting, perceivably pervasive use of science and metrics in decision making, especially with decisions that we associate with the use of morality or ‘the human element,’ often challenges our perception of ourselves and our ability to arrive at what is ‘right.’ ‘Neuroprediction of future rearrest’, primarily written by Eyal Aharoni, describes a series of experiments which aimed to study the relation of activity in the Anterior Cingulate Cortex (ACC), a part of the brain associated with the the inhibition process, to the risk of rearrest among adult offenders. The study found that, indeed, there is a strong inverse relation between the activity in the ACC and the rate of rearrest. A second paper, ‘Extraneous factors in judicial decisions’, studied a group of penal judges to determine if something as seemingly trivial as taking a food-break could influence the decision making of the judges. …show more content…
The study finds that even when taking other factors into consideration, a judge’s decision making is not consistent throughout the day and is highly dependent on something as arbitrary as when they ate. The biggest take away from that study is that even regardless of how judges’ personal views, experiences, and intentions affects their decisions, something as trivial as when they eat affects their decision making process. Therefore, by relying more on scientific indicators such as brain scanning of the ACC and less on the mercurial judgement of judges, courtrooms can both provide a more consistent and, consequently, fair judging for offenders while reducing the the rate of risky behavior committed by paroled