The influence of neuroscience on US Supreme Court decisions about adolescents' criminal culpability

Nature Reviews Neuroscience

Volumn 14, Issue 7, 2013, Pages 513-518

  Steinberg, Laurence ^a  

^a TEMPLE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENCE; ADOLESCENT; ADOLESCENT BEHAVIOR; ADOLESCENT DEVELOPMENT; AUTOMUTILATION; BRAIN DEVELOPMENT; CHILD BEHAVIOR; COGNITION; CRIME; DRIVE; DROWNING; EXECUTIVE FUNCTION; HOMICIDE; HUMAN; IMMATURITY; JURISPRUDENCE; JUVENILE DELINQUENCY; LEGAL ASPECT; NEUROBIOLOGY; NEUROSCIENCE; PARENTAL ATTITUDE; PLANNING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUNISHMENT; RAPE; REVIEW; SENSATION SEEKING; UNITED STATES;

ADOLESCENT; CRIMINAL LAW; HISTORY, 21ST CENTURY; HUMANS; JUVENILE DELINQUENCY; NEUROSCIENCES; SUPREME COURT DECISIONS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84879411355     PISSN: 1471003X     EISSN: 14710048     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nrn3509     Document Type: Review

References (43)

1. Elias, P. Many question life sentences for juveniles. USA Today [online], http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-08-18/juvenile-life- sentences/57130414/1 (18 Aug 2012).
2. Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. (2012).
3. Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005).
4. Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. (2010).
5. Transcript of oral argument in Roper v. Simmons, S. Ct. 2004) No. 03-633
6. American Psychological Association. Amicus curiae brief in Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551. American Psychological Association [online], http://www.apa.org/about/offices/ogc/amicus/roper.pdf (2005).
7. Stinneford, J. Rethinking proportionality under the cruel and unusual punishments clause. Virginia Law Rev. 97, 899-978 (2011).
8. Thompson v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 815 (1988).
9. Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002).
10. Stanford v. Kentucky, 492 U.S. 361 (1989).
11. Snyder, H. N. Arrest in the United States, 1990-2010. Bureau of Justice Statistics [online], http://www. bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/aus9010.pdf (2012).
12. Steinberg, L. A social neuroscience perspective on adolescent risk-taking. Dev. Rev. 28, 78-106 (2008).
13. Harden, K. P. & Tucker-Drob, E. M. Individual differences in the development of sensation seeking and impulsivity during adolescence: further evidence for a dual systems model. Dev. Psychol. 47, 739-746 (2011).
14. Steinberg, L. & Scott, E. S. Less guilty by reason of adolescence: developmental immaturity, diminished responsibility, and the juvenile death penalty. Am. Psychol. 58, 1009-1018 (2003). (Pubitemid 38023979)
15. Steinberg, L. & Monahan, K. C. Age differences in resistance to peer influence. Dev. Psychol. 43, 1531-1543 (2007).
16. Gardner, M. & Steinberg, L. Peer influence on risk taking, risk preference, and risky decision making in adolescence and adulthood: an experimental study. Dev. Psychol. 41, 625-635 (2005). (Pubitemid 41168503)
17. Farrington, D. in Crime and Justice: an Annual Review of Research (eds Tonry, M. & Morris, N.)189-217 (Univ. of Chicago Press, 1986).
18. Moffitt, T. E. Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: a developmental taxonomy. Psychol. Rev. 100, 674-701 (1993).
19. Steinberg, L. Adolescent development and juvenile justice. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 5, 459-485 (2009).
20. Luciana, M. (ed.) Adolescent brain development: current themes and future directions. Brain Cogn. 72 (2010).
21. Casey, B. J., Getz, S. & Galvan, A. The adolescent brain. Dev. Rev. 28, 62-77 (2008).
22. Schmithorst, V. J. & Yuan, W. White matter development during adolescence as shown by diffusion MRI. Brain Cogn. 72, 16-25 (2010).
23. Olesen, P. J., Nagy, Z., Westerberg, H. & Klingberg, T. Combined analysis of DTI and fMRI data reveals a joint maturation of white and grey matter in a frontoparietal network. Brain Res. Cogn. Brain Res. 18, 48-57 (2003). (Pubitemid 37500974)
24. Vincent, J. L., Kahn, I., Snyder, A. Z., Raichle, M. E. & Buckner, R. L. Evidence for a frontoparietal control system revealed by intrinsic functional connectivity. J. Neurophysiol.100, 3328-3342 (2008).
25. Liston, C. et al. Frontostriatal microstructure predicts individual differences in cognitive control. Cereb. Cortex 16, 553-560 (2006).
26. Dosenbach, N. U. et al. Prediction of individual brain maturity using fMRI. Science 329, 1358-1361 (2010).
27. Luna, B., Padmanabhan, A. & O'Hearn, K. What has fMRI told us about the development of cognitive control through adolescence? Brain Cogn. 72, 101-113 (2010).
28. Stevens, M. C., Kiehl, K. A., Pearlson, G. D. & Calhoun, V. D. Functional neural networks underlying response inhibition in adolescents and adults. Behav. Brain Res. 181, 12-22 (2007). (Pubitemid 46765001)
29. Galvan, A. et al. Earlier development of the accumbens relative to orbitofrontal cortex may underlie risk taking in adolescence. J. Neurosci. 26, 6885-6892 (2006). (Pubitemid 44315249)
30. Hare, T. A. et al. Biolgical substrates of emotional reactivity and regulation in adolescence during an emotional go-nogo task. Biol. Psychiatry 63, 927-934 (2008). (Pubitemid 351602274)
31. Steinberg, L. A dual systems model of adolescent risk-taking. Dev. Psychobiol. 52, 216-224 (2010).
32. Chein, J., Albert, D., O'Brien, L., Uckert, K. & Steinberg, L. Peers increase adolescent risk taking by enhancing activity in the brain's reward circuitry. D e v. Sci. 14, F1-F10 (2011).
33. Casey, B. J. et al. The storm and stress of adolescence: insights from human imaging and mouse genetics. Dev. Psychobiol. 52, 225-235 (2010).
34. Burnett, S., Sebastian, C., Kadosh, K. & Blakemore, S.-J. The social brain in adolescence: evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging and behavioural studies. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 35, 1654-1664 (2011).
35. Pfeifer, J. H. & Allen, N. B. Arrested development? Reconsidering dual-systems models of brain function in adolescence and disorders. Trends Cogn. Sci. 16, 322-329 (2012).
36. Crone, E. A. & Dahl, R. E. Understanding adolescence as a period of social-affective engagement and goal flexibility. Nature Rev. Neurosci. 13, 636-650 (2012).
37. Hodgson v. Minnesota, 497 U.S. 417 (1990).
38. Weisberg, D. S., Keil, F. C., Goodstein, J., Rawson, E. & Gray, J. R. The seductive allure of neuroscience explanations. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 20, 470-477 (2008). (Pubitemid 351317605)
39. Aspinwall, L. G., Brown, T. R. & Tabery, J. The double-edged sword: does biomechanism increase or decrease judges' sentencing of psychopaths? Science 337, 846-849 (2012).
40. Steinberg, L. Should the science of adolescent brain development inform public policy? Issues Sci. Technol. Spring, 67-78 (2012).
41. Kays, J. L., Hurley, R. A. & Taber, K. H. The dynamic brain: neuroplasticity and mental health. J. Clin. Neurosychiatry Clin. Neurosci. 24, 118-124 (2012).
42. Shannon, B. J. et al. Premotor functional connectivity predicts impulsivity in juvenile offenders. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 11241-11245 (2011).
43. Chase-Lansdale, P. L., Mott, F. L., Brooks-Gunn, J. & Phillips, D. A. Children of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth: a unique research opportunity. D e v. Psychol. 27, 918-931 (1991).