Criminalizing the brain: Neurocriminology and the production of strategic ignorance
Criminalizing the brain: Neurocriminology and the production of strategic ignorance
复制标题
DOI：
10.1057/s41292-018-0135-y
复制
发表时间：
2019-09-01
期刊：
影响因子：
1.6
通讯作者：
Barker, Kristin Kay
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fallin, Mallory;Whooley, Owen;Barker, Kristin Kay
随着功能磁共振成像等成像技术在监狱量刑和刑事政策中的使用越来越多，社会学家必须理解这些趋势的后果以及它们所依据的科学假设。本文利用知识社会学的见解来质疑神经犯罪学的认识论和本体论假设，神经犯罪学是研究犯罪神经基础的跨学科领域。通过对包含我们所谓的“神经犯罪学视野”的研究文章进行话语分析，我们展示了研究设计的特征如何避开对犯罪和反社会行为背后的社会因素的考虑。我们重点关注控制变量的选择、实验任务的“薄弱”以及对不便事实的管理，展示了神经犯罪学研究如何将复杂的社会情境行为转化为神经回路问题。我们将这些实践与神经犯罪学所处的特定领域的动态联系起来，特别是作为一个跨学科领域，它从神经科学中获得权威，但在犯罪学中遭到了怀疑。为了应对这些动态，神经犯罪学家不仅产生知识，而且产生无知，考虑到他们的职业目标，这些知识在战略上是有用的。除了当前的具体案例之外，我们还强调科学领域内的内部动态及其对知识和无知共同生产的影响之间的关系。
With the increasing use of imaging technologies like fMRI in prison sentencing and penal policy, sociologists must comprehend the consequences of these trends and the scientific assumptions upon which they stand. This article uses insights from the sociology of knowledge to interrogate the epistemological and ontological assumptions of neurocriminology, an interdisciplinary field that studies the neural basis of crime. Through a discourse analysis of research articles that embrace what we term the "neurocriminological vision," we demonstrate how features of the research design eschew the consideration of social factors underlying crime and antisocial behavior. Focusing on the selection of control variables, the 'thinness' of experimental tasks, and the management of inconvenient facts, we demonstrate how neurocriminological research transforms complex, socially situated behaviors into problems of neurocircuitry. We link these practices to the field-specific dynamics in which neurocriminology is situated, specifically as an interdisciplinary field which derives authority from neuroscience but is met with skepticism within criminology. In response to these dynamics, neurocriminologists produce not only knowledge, but also ignorance that is strategically useful given their professional goals. Beyond the particular case at hand, we emphasize the relationship between internal dynamics within scientific fields and their effects on the co-production of knowledge and ignorance.