User talk:RALDER/sandbox

Brain Overclaim Syndrome
Brain Overclaim Syndrome (BOS) is a cognitive psychological phenomenon proposed by the American professor of law and psychology Stephen J. Morse, where a person has the belief that neuroscience outweighs criminal responsibility. BOS is commonly found in lawyers, judges, and other members of the criminal justice system. In the context of a court case, these individuals believe that a defendant who is on trial for antisocial behavior is not responsible for their actions because their brain is not fully developed.

Background
Brain Overclaim Syndrome was theorized by Morse and currently is not found in any variation of the DSM. Morse theorized BOS in 2006 shortly after Roper v. Simmons determined that capital punishment on a person under the age of 18 is unconstitutional and an infringement of the Eighth Amendment. Similarly, Miller v. Alabama stated that life imprisonment without parole for a minor is also an infringement of the Eighth Amendment. Supporters of the abolishment of the death penalty for juveniles convicted of murder believe they are less responsible for their actions because of the lack of myelination on cortical neurons within their brains. Despite this difference between an adolescent and a mature brain, this difference isn't shown to be responsible for any significant behavioral abnormalities.

Signs and symptoms
The current etiology for BOS will most likely show some or all of the following symptoms.


 * "Confusion about the relation between the brain and complex." Individuals showing signs of BOS may prematurely draw conclusions based on current neuroscience data, when in reality correlation does not equal causation due to the lack of a known mechanism. This becomes common in BOS because a biological mechanism is seen as more credible than a behavioral perspective.
 * "Confusion of internal and external critiques." This is similar to the first symptom where an individual will use language that suggests causation when causation isn't actually known. Morse describes this most commonly as being identified as "partial knowledge" manifesting into "partial causation" which doesn't exist and isn't scientifically accurate.
 * "Misunderstanding for the criteria of responsibility." An unaffected individual would make the connection that brains are not the only reason a person commits a crime, despite their behavior being controlled by the brain. A crime is committed if the individual performs the behavior for that crime, otherwise the person has no criminal activity and is therefore not responsible.
 * "Confusion of the normative and the positive." Individuals exhibiting BOS tend to use neuroscience in excess and from that make drastic assumptions based off of that evidence. Morse describes this phenomenon as deriving something that "ought" to be because of something that "is".

Morse added a fifth symptom in 2013, which he calls "overconfidence in neuroscience". Simply enough, Morse describes that in reality our knowledge of the brain in relation to behavior creates more questions than it answers. Brain imaging such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) bring into question about the controversial hypothesis of brain fingerprinting, where the fMRI can act as evidence such as lies the subject has told or deeds the subject has committed. In other words, neuroscientists know that interconnective signals occur to exhibit a complex behavior but it is scientifically unknown what these interconnective signals are or how they work exactly. In addition, Morse says that "virtually no studies have been performed to address specifically legal questions." This indication implies that even the knowledge neuroscientists do possess doesn't equate to clarity in criminology.

Treatment
According to Morse, the most effective method of treating Brain Overclaim Syndrome is a therapy he calls Cognitive Jurotherapy (CJ). According to the Society of Clinical Psychology, CJ is not recognized as a formal treatment for any psychiatric disorder, and also doesn't include BOS as a psychiatric disorder. BOS is characterized by cognitive dysfunction, the treatment method involves cognitive replacement through motivation and practice. CJ mainly involves educating the individual in neuroscience from the scope of philosophy and the mind by counteracting the symptoms of BOS. This would include introducing neuroscience complexes, their involvement with external/internal critques, investigating the criterion for responsibility, and understanding positive and normative distinction of neuroscience in relation to crime.

Peer Review
1.	Lead Section 2.	Article 3.	References 4.	New Article Overall, this article is very interesting, well-written and the information covered seems thorough. The Background section is the strongest, with examples and relevant information clearly presented in an organized and orderly manner. Adding more information and more detail, and perhaps some other sources (preferably unrelated to Morse, if possible) would help to make this article more complete, comprehensive, and balanced.
 * I find the definition of BOS difficult to follow. Is BOS referring to the general belief that criminal responsibility depends on neuroscience and brain development, which leads people to believe that minors should not be persecuted as harshly as adults? Rewording the definition and adding a little bit more detail would help to clarify exactly what BOS means and who experiences it. Are the minors who commit crimes the ones with BOS? Or is it the lawyers/ judges/ court members that have BOS? More detail on the specifics of the disorder, who it primarily affects, why it is classified as a disorder, what the problems are with it, etc. would be helpful in clarifying the basics of BOS.
 * The Background section is clear and concise, citing relevant court cases and the eighth amendment to explain the history of BOS. However, the statement that BOS “currently is not found in any variation in the DSM” is a little confusing. Does this mean that BOS just isn’t identified/ defined in the DSM? And is this due to the fact that it has yet to be incorporated into the DSM/ we don’t know enough about it to include it in the DSM? Or has it been kept out of the DSM for a particular reason? Also, the last sentence, about the abolition of the death penalty – is that referring only to abolishing it in regards to minors? Or is that referring to the complete and entire abolishment of the death penalty regardless of age/ crime severity?
 * Signs and Symptoms – this section would benefit from a numbered or bulleted list of the five symptoms. Written in paragraph form makes it difficult to keep track of each symptom, and to distinguish between them. The explanations of each symptom are thorough, but I am still wondering, are these signs/ symptoms used to diagnose BOS? Can it even be diagnosed if it is not in the DSM? How are these signs and symptoms used in relation to BOS and what does the mechanism of diagnosis entail?
 * Treatment
 * 1) More detail on CJ would be beneficial here – what does the process of “educating of neuroscience in the scope of philosophy and the mind by counteracting the symptoms of BOS” mean? What would this therapy look like? Who is responsible for treating people with BOS and employing this type of therapy?
 * 2) What is the “criterion for responsibility”? This seems like it could be really important/ helpful in starting to incorporate/ identify other viewpoints in addition to that of Morse. Do people with BOS fail to acknowledge the criterion of responsibility? And what do these criteria entail? Who came up with these criteria and who recognizes them as important/ relevant? Who uses these criteria?
 * Relevant information is fully cited, and sources appear to be appropriate. However, the primary source for all of the information contained in the article is one person (Stephen Morse). Because only one person’s theories/ view points are expressed, the article feels a little unbalanced with information from only one side being presented.
 * The body is divided into relevant sections that logically break up the information presented. While the coverage on the topic seems well researched with statements associated with supporting references, the overall coverage does not seem entirely comprehensive, as it seems as though only one person’s thoughts are being presented. If this is due to a lack of other sources, and Morse is one of the few or the only person examining this phenomenon, then a sentence stating that would be helpful to understand why only a single side/ argument is being presented.

Cedwgd1212 (talk) 19:48, 1 April 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RALDER (talk • contribs)