EMAIL QUESTIONS TO [email protected]
a) Reliability, validity, from group data to the individual
Do we know enough about individuals and their actual behavioural
traits to interpret brain imaging evidence of behavioural traits back to
the individual? Sinnot-Armstrong
How reliable are neuro-imaging patterns of behavioural
characteristics? In other words should an otherwise normal individual
be worried if following participation in a functional imaging
experiment, they are told that they have anti-social behavioural
disorder tendencies?
How reliable are neuroimaging markers of memory, emotion and
psychopathy?
Are there any circumstances in which group results from
neuroimaging can or should be applied to individuals?
Thursday am
b) Privacy and Data Protection
What are the likely capabilities that brain imaging will
achieve in the next 10 years that would impact on
privacy and society?
Is widespread use of neuro-imaging by commercial
marketing companies and Governments and acceptable
invasion of privacy?
Is neuro-imaging an acceptable invasion of privacy in any
circumstances?
Should, or can, neuro-imaging data acquired outside
research or medical environments, be subject to the
same data protection practices as data acquired in
research/medical environments? Sinnot-Armstrong
Thursday pm
a) Forensic uses of imaging
• Should functional MRI be available to courts of law for
use in lie detection?
• Should functional MRI be available to Courts of Law to
ascertain whether the accused is familiar with a crime
scene?
• Should neuroimaging be used to detect when someone
is lying? Kessler
• Under what circumstances, if any, might/would it be
appropriate to use neuroimaging results in support of
prosecuting/defending a criminal action?
Thursday pm
b) Science, Law and Society
• What are the implications, for vulnerable individuals, for
more widespread use of functional imaging techniques in
society as a whole?
• Should neuroimaging be available to determine what
someone’s true preferences are as opposed to their
verbally expressed preferences?
• Is it acceptable to apply a different standard of proof for
neuroimaging used in science as to neuroimaging used
in law?
• Does the standard of proof required for neuroimaging
when used in science invalidate the use of neuroimaging
in law? Kessler
Friday am
a) Science, Business, Profit, Financial Conflict and
Government Regulation of Commerce
• Neuro-marketing – what is it and should use of imaging
be encouraged as part of it?
• Neuroimaging – when should a tool designed for use in
science stray into use in commerce?
• Is it morally acceptable for information on personal
preferences to be used in marketing for economic gain
(eg banning of subliminal “flash” adverts of refreshments
in cinemas many years ago).
• Does the standard of proof required for neuroimaging
when used in science invalidate the use of neuroimaging
to inform marketing strategies for economic gain?
Friday am
b) Protecting the Wider World from Dangerous
Individuals
• Is structural or functional imaging of sufficient sensitivity
or specificity to be used as evidence of behavioural
characteristics in a Court of Law?
• Should functional MRI be used in the prison service to
assess inmates’ readiness for release to reduce the risk
of releasing persistently, potentially dangerous
individuals?
• Should governments regulate now for future anticipated
neuro-imaging capabilities?
• Should brain imaging be used in counter-terrorism, for
example in airport scanners to map gyral patterns for
recognising individuals (to overcome effects of plastic
surgery), or to identify personality traits that predict
terrorist behaviours with fMRI?