en esa misma línea otro artículo de revisión: https://t.co/Qo1z4xkmoA
@ZenaMOBrien2 https://t.co/9r0TV1DoVX This one has a good amount of references. And this article is about thought visuslisation https://t.co/xzDM7MROdG
Although the relevance/allure of neuroimaging in court/verdicts seems to be less salient: https://t.co/L2Ztt2ySQl cf all those allure of neuroimaging studies of the past.
Neuroscientific evidence in the courtroom: a review---https://t.co/cn3mGYxtAe
RT @NoraNewcombe: Brain images do NOT seem to affect legal decisions #gocrpi @Psychonomic_Soc https://t.co/WJJsOBq2sB
Brain images do NOT seem to affect legal decisions #gocrpi @Psychonomic_Soc https://t.co/WJJsOBq2sB
Neuroscientific evidence in the courtroom: new review finds mitigating effects as well as moderating effects of psychiatric diagnoses and perceived dangerousness: https://t.co/1LdeJvbG5q
RT @memovocab: [Review] Effects of neuroscientific evidence on jurors and judges? Paper in open access https://t.co/TVBsBeOl13
RT @memovocab: [Review] Effects of neuroscientific evidence on jurors and judges? Paper in open access https://t.co/TVBsBeOl13
RT @memovocab: [Review] Effects of neuroscientific evidence on jurors and judges? Paper in open access https://t.co/TVBsBeOl13
[Review] Effects of neuroscientific evidence on jurors and judges? Paper in open access https://t.co/TVBsBeOl13