What we should really worry about in pediatric functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)

American Journal of Bioethics

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 16-18

  Connors, Caitlin M ^a   Singh, Ilina ^a  

^a LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; AGGRESSION; ATTENTION DEFICIT DISORDER; CHILD; CHILD BEHAVIOR; COGNITION; CRIME; EDUCATION; ETHICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; LEARNING; LEARNING DISORDER; LEGAL ASPECT; MALE; NEEDS ASSESSMENT; NOTE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PEDIATRICS; PHYSIOLOGY; POLICY; SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; UNITED STATES;

ADOLESCENT; ADOLESCENT BEHAVIOR; AGGRESSION; ATTENTION DEFICIT AND DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR DISORDERS; CHILD; COGNITION; CRIME; EDUCATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; LEARNING; LEARNING DISORDERS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; NEEDS ASSESSMENT; PEDIATRICS; PREJUDICE; PUBLIC POLICY; SEX CHARACTERISTICS; STEREOTYPING; UNITED STATES;

EID: 60849097298     PISSN: 15265161     EISSN: 15360075     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15265160802617944     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Baron-Cohen, S. 2004. The Essential Difference: The Truth About the Male and Female Brain. New York, NY: BasicBooks.
2. Beaulieu, A. 2000. Space Inside the Skull: Digital Representations, Brain Mapping and Cognitive Neuroscience in the Decade of the Brain. University of Amsterdam Doctoral Dissertation. University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
3. Beaulieu, A. 2001. Voxels in the brain: Neuroscience, informatics and changing notions of objectivity. Social Studies of Science 31(5): 635-680.
4. Brescoll, V., and LaFrance, M. 2004. The correlates and consequences of newspaper reports of research on sex differences. Psychological Science 15: 515-520.
5. Dar-Nimrod, I. D., and Heine, S. J. 2006. Exposure to scientific theories affects women's math performance. Science 314: 415.
6. Decety, J., Michalska, K.J., Akitsuki, Y., and Lahey, B. 2008. A typical emphatic responses in adolescents with aggressive conduct disorder: A functional MRI investigation. Biological Psychology, In Press.
7. Dumit, J. 2004. Picturing personhood: Brain Scans and Biomedical Identity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
8. Fausto-Sterline, A. 1992. Myths of Gender: Biological Theories About Women and Men. New York, NY: Basic Books.
9. Fenton, A., Meynell, L., and Baylis, F. 2009. Ethical challenges and interpretive difficulties with non-clinical applications of pediatric fMRI. American Journal of Bioethics (AJOB Neuroscience) 9(1): 3-13.
10. Fine, C. 2008. Will working mothers' brains explode? The popular new genre of neurosexism. Neuroethics 1: 69-72.
11. Hyde, J. S., Lindberg, S. M., Linn, M. C., Ellis, A. B., and Williams, C. C. 2008. Gender similarities characterize math performance. Science 321: 494-495.
12. Jussim, L., Palumbo, P., Chatman, C., Madon, S., and Smith, A. 2003. Stigma and self-fulfilling prophecies. In The Social Psychology of Stigma. New York, NY: Guildford Press.
13. McCabe, D. P., and Castel, A. D. 2008. Seeing is believing: The effect of brain images on judgments of scientific reasoning. Cognition 107: 343-353.
14. Mobbs, D., Lau, H. C., Jones, O. D., Frith, C. D. 2007. Law, responsibility and the brain. PLoS Biology 5: 0693-0700.
15. Odgers, C. L., Moffitt, E. T., Broadbent, J. M. et al. 2008. Female and male antisocial trajectories: From childhood origins to adult outcomes. Development and Psychopathology 20: 673-716.
16. Rivers, C., and Barnett, R. C. October 28, 2007. The difference myth. Boston Globe. Available at http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/ articles/2007/10/28/the-difference-myth (accessed November 1, 2008).
17. Roper v. Simmons. 2005. 543 U.S. 551; Brief for Respondent, 2004 U.S. Supreme Court Briefs LEXIS 559; Brief Amicus Curiae of the American Bar Association, 2004 U.S. Supreme Court Briefs LEXIS 425.
18. Rose, N. 2000. The biology of culpability: Pathological identities in a biological culture. Theoretical Criminology 4: 5-34.
19. Sax, L. 2005. Why Gender Matters: What Parents and Teachers Need to Know About the Emerging Science of Sex Differences. New York, NY: Doubleday.
20. Singh, I. 2008. Beyond polemics: Science and ethics of ADHD. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 9: 957-964.
21. Skolnick-Weisberg, D., Keil, F. C., Goodstein, J., Rawson, E., and Gray, J. R. 2008. The seductive allure of neuroscience explanations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 20: 470-477.
22. Spelke, E. S. 2005. Sex differences in the intrinsic aptitude for mathematics and science? A critical review. American Psychologist 60: 950-958.
23. Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., and Quinn, D. M. 1999. Stereotype threat and women's math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 35: 4-28.
24. van Goozen, S. H. M., and Fairchild, G. 2006. Neuroendocrine and neurotransmitter correlates in children with antisocial behaviour. Hormones and Behavior 50: 647-654.
25. Viding, E., Blair, J. R., Moffitt, T. E., and Plomin, R. 2004. Evidence for substantial genetic risk for psychopathy in 7-year-olds. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 6: 592-297.
26. Weil, E. March 2, 2008. Teaching boys and girls separately. New York Times. Available at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/02/magazine/02sex3-t.html (accessed November 1, 2008).