Kellmeyer Philipp
Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2017 Oct;26(4):530-554. doi: 10.1017/S096318011700007X.
Currently, many scientific fields such as psychology or biomedicine face a methodological crisis concerning the reproducibility, replicability, and validity of their research. In neuroimaging, similar methodological concerns have taken hold of the field, and researchers are working frantically toward finding solutions for the methodological problems specific to neuroimaging. This article examines some ethical and legal implications of this methodological crisis in neuroimaging. With respect to ethical challenges, the article discusses the impact of flawed methods in neuroimaging research in cognitive and clinical neuroscience, particularly with respect to faulty brain-based models of human cognition, behavior, and personality. Specifically examined is whether such faulty models, when they are applied to neurological or psychiatric diseases, could put patients at risk, and whether this places special obligations on researchers using neuroimaging. In the legal domain, the actual use of neuroimaging as evidence in United States courtrooms is surveyed, followed by an examination of ways that the methodological problems may create challenges for the criminal justice system. Finally, the article reviews and promotes some promising ideas and initiatives from within the neuroimaging community for addressing the methodological problems.
目前，许多科学领域，如心理学或生物医学，在其研究的可重复性、可复制性和有效性方面面临着一场方法学危机。在神经成像领域，类似的方法学问题也已占据该领域，研究人员正疯狂地努力寻找针对神经成像特定方法学问题的解决方案。本文探讨了神经成像领域这一方法学危机的一些伦理和法律影响。关于伦理挑战，本文讨论了神经成像研究中存在缺陷的方法在认知神经科学和临床神经科学中的影响，特别是关于基于大脑的人类认知、行为和个性的错误模型。具体探讨的是，当这些错误模型应用于神经或精神疾病时，是否会使患者面临风险，以及这是否给使用神经成像的研究人员带来特殊义务。在法律领域，本文调查了神经成像在美国法庭上作为证据的实际使用情况，随后考察了方法学问题可能给刑事司法系统带来挑战的方式。最后，本文回顾并推广了神经成像界内部一些解决方法学问题的有前景的想法和倡议。
