Bizzi, E., Hyman, S. E., et al. (2009). Using imaging to identify deceit: Scientific and ethical questions. Cambridge, MA: American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Blair, R. J. R. (2007). What emotional responding is to blame it might not be to responsibility. Philosophy, Psychiatry & Psychology,
Bomann-Larsen, L. (2011). Voluntary rehabilitation? on neurotechnological behavioural treatment, valid consent and (In)appropriate offers. Neuroethics (OnlineFirst). doi:10.1007/s12152-011-9105-9.
Burgess, A. (2000). A clockwork orange (with an introduction by Blake Morrison). London: Penguin Books Ltd.
Chandler, J. A. (2010). Reading the judicial mind: Predicting the courts’ reaction to the use of neuroscientific evidence for lie detection. Dalhousie Law Journal,
Coukell, A. (2006). No more lies. Proto: 32–7.
Dahan-Katz, L. (forthcoming). The implications of heuristics and biases research on moral and legal responsibility: A case against the reasonable person standard. Neuroscience and Legal Responsibility. N. Vincent, OUP.
Davies, P. (forthcoming). Skepticism concerning human agency: Sciences of the self vs. ‘voluntariness’ in the law. In N. Vincent (Ed.), Neuroscience and Legal Responsibility. OUP.
Eagleman, D. M. (2008). Neuroscience and the Law. Houston Lawyer,
Farah, M. J., Illes, J., et al. (2004). Neurocognitive enhancement: what can we do and what should we do? Nature Reviews Neuroscience,
Farahany, N. A. (2012). Incriminating thoughts. Stanford Law Review,
Farisco, M., & Petrini, C. (2012). The impact of neuroscience and genetics on the law: A recent Italian case. Neuroethics OnlineFirst: 1–3. doi:10.1007/s12152-012-9152-x.
Feresin, E. (2009). Lighter sentence for murderer with ‘bad genes’. Nature News. doi:10.1038/news.2009.1050.
Fine, C., & Kennett, J. (2004). Mental impairment, moral understanding and criminal responsibility: Psychopathy and the purposes of punishment. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry,
Fox, D. (2011). The right to silence protects mental control. Law and Neuroscience, Current Legal Issues, 13. M. Freeman. Oxford, UK, OUP: 335–66.
Gazzaniga, M. S. (2008). The law and neuroscience. Neuron
60(November 6): 412–415.
Glannon, W. (2008). Psychopharmacological enhancement. Neuroethics,
Glannon, W. (2011). Diminishing and enhancing free will. AJOB Neuroscience,
Goodenough, O. R., & Tucker, M. (2010). Law and cognitive neuroscience. Annual Review of Law and Social Science,
Greely, H. T. (2008). Neuroscience and criminal justice: Not responsibility but treatment. University of Kansas Law Review,
Greely, H. T. (2009). Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?: Behavioral genomics, neuroscience, criminal law, and the search for hidden knowledge. The Impact of Behavioral Sciences on Criminal Law. N. A. Farahany. New York, NY, OUP: 161–79.
Greely, H. T. (2012). Direct brain interventions to treat disfavored human behaviors: Ethical and social issues. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics,
Greene, J., & Cohen, J. D. (2004). For the law, neuroscience changes nothing and everything. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: 1775–1785. doi:10.1098/rstb.2004.1546.
Haji, I. (2010). Psychopathy, ethical perception, and moral culpability. Neuroethics,
Hirstein, W., & Sifferd, C. (2011). The legal self: Executive processes and legal theory. Consciousness and Cognition,
Houston, L., & Vierboom, A. (2012). Neuroscience and law: Australia. International Neurolaw. T. M. Spranger. Heidelberg, DE, Springer: 11–42.
Jones, O. D. (2004). Law, evolution and the brain: applications and open questions. Law and the Brain. S. Zeki and O. R. Goodenough. New York, Oxford University Press: 57–75.
Jones, O. D., & Buckholtz, J. W., et al. (2009). Brain imaging for legal thinkers: A guide for the perplexed. Stanford Technology Law Review: 5. Accessed on May 29, 2012 at http://stlr.stanford.edu/pdf/jones-brain-imaging.pdf.
Kaplan, J. (2009). Misinformation, misrepresentation, and misuse of human behavioral genetics research. The Impact of Behavioral Sciences on Criminal Law. N. A. Farahany. New York, NY, OUP: 45–80.
Lekovic, G. P. (2008). Neuroscience and the law. Surgical Neurology,
Levy, N. (2007). Neuroethics: Challenges for the 21st century. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK.
Levy, N. (forthcoming). Moral responsibility and consciousness: two challenges, one solution. Neuroscience and Legal Responsibility. N. Vincent, OUP.
Lewis, C. S. (1963). The humanitarian theory of punishment. Res Judicatae,
Martell, D. A. (1992). Forensic neuropsychology and the criminal law. Law and Human Behavior,
Mobbs, D., Lau, H. C., et al. (2007). Law, responsibility, and the brain. PLoS Biology,
Morse, S. J. (2006). Brain overclaim syndrome and criminal responsibility: A diagnostic note. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law,
Nishimoto, S., Vu, A. T., et al. (2011). Reconstructing visual experiences from brain activity evoked by natural movies. Current Biology,
Prado, M. S., & Patterson, D. (2010). Philosophical foundations of law and neuroscience. University of Illinois Law Review,
Rosen, J. (2007). The brain on the stand. The New York Times.
The Royal Society. (2011). Brain waves module 4: Neuroscience and the law. London, UK: The Royal Society.
Tovino, S. A. (2007). Functional neuroimaging and the law: Trends and directions for future scholarship. The American Journal of Bioethics,
Vedder, A., & Klaming, L. (2010). Human enhancement for the common good—using neurotechnologies to improve eyewitness memory. AJOB Neuroscience,
Vincent, N. (2010). On the relevance of neuroscience to criminal responsibility. Criminal Law and Philosophy,
Vincent, N. (forthcoming). Enhancing responsibility. In N. Vincent (Ed.), Neuroscience and Legal Responsibility. OUP.