School of Law, University of Virginia, 580 Massie Road, Charlottesville, Virginia 22903, USA.
Trends Cogn Sci. 2010 Mar;14(3):101-3. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2009.12.004. Epub 2010 Jan 8.
The possibility of using neuroimaging to detect deception in legal settings has generated widespread resistance. Many neuroscientists insist the research is flawed science, containing weaknesses of reliability (the degree of accuracy), external validity (do laboratory results predict real-world outcomes), and construct validity (do studies test what they purport to test). These flaws are real, but although using neural lie-detection in non-experimental legal settings is premature, the critics are mistaken in believing that scientific standards should determine when these methods are ready for legal use. Law's goals differ from science's, and the legal suitability of neural lie-detection depends on legal standards and not those determining what good science is.
使用神经影像学在法律环境中检测欺骗的可能性引起了广泛的抵制。许多神经科学家坚持认为这项研究是有缺陷的科学,存在可靠性(准确性程度)、外部有效性(实验室结果是否预测现实结果)和结构有效性(研究是否测试其声称要测试的内容)方面的弱点。这些缺陷是真实存在的,但尽管在非实验性法律环境中使用神经测谎还为时过早,但批评者错误地认为,科学标准应该决定这些方法何时可以用于法律用途。法律的目标与科学的目标不同,神经测谎的法律适用性取决于法律标准,而不是决定什么是好科学的标准。