Home → Releases → 2022, №3 (47) →

The Need for Legal Regulation of the Use of Neurocognitive and Psychophysiological Technologies in Practice

Public Law , UDC: 612.821; 316.422 DOI: 10.25688/2076-9113.2022.47.3.08

Authors

  • Kovalchuk Mikhail Valentinovich Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Professor
  • Yatsishina Ekaterina Borisovna Doctor of Philosophy
  • Demin Vyacheslav Alexandrovich Candidate of Physical and Mathematical Sciences
  • Kholodny Yuri Ivanovich Doctor of Law, Candidate of Psychological Sciences

Annotation

This article reflects the results of the study, as a result of which the dialectical path of the convergence of sciences is shown, which led to the emergence of science-driven technologies for experimental studies of the human brain and psyche and the emergence of a body of scientific knowledge, united under the common name neuroscience; the place of the branch of neurolaw in the system of neurosciences is presented; a brief review of some areas of neurolaw (in particular, neurocriminalistics and neurocriminology) is given. The evolution of the methods used in experimental psychophysiology in the 20th – 21st centuries is briefly shown (from the methods of recording physiological reactions to the methods of neuroimaging). The history, development difficulties and the current state of the polygraph research method in Russia, which was the forerunner of neuroimaging methods and widely used in domestic law enforcement practice are briefly reviewed. The significance of the study lies in posing the question of the need for strict legal regulation of the use of research using polygraph and neuroimaging methods in public practice.
Tags:
neuroscience; neurolaw; forensic psychophysiology; neurocognitive technologies; polygraph.

How to link insert

Kovalchuk, M. V., Yatsishina, E. B., Demin, V. A. & Kholodny, Y. I. (2022). The Need for Legal Regulation of the Use of Neurocognitive and Psychophysiological Technologies in Practice Bulletin of the Moscow City Pedagogical University. Series "Pedagogy and Psychology", 2022, №3 (47), 85. https://doi.org/10.25688/2076-9113.2022.47.3.08
References
1. 1. Aver`yanova T. V., Majlis N. P., Xolodny`j Yu. I. Psixofiziologicheskaya e`kspertiza s primeneniem poligrafa: xaos i ego prichiny` // Ugolovny`j process. 2018. № 10. S. 70–79.
2. 2. Volchinskaya E. K., Xolodny`j Yu. I. Pora navodit` poryadok (neskol`ko zamechanij k zakonoproektu «O primenenii poligrafa») // Vestnik Akademii e`konomicheskoj bezopasnosti MVD Rossii. 2009. № 11. S. 57–73.
3. 3. Interv`yu vedushhix specialistov-poligrafologov o rezul`tatax i perspektivax primeneniya metoda v Rossii // Detekciya lzhi. 2021. Vy`p. 3. S. 66–79.
4. 4. Koval`chuk M. V., Narajkin O. S., Yacishina E. B. Konvergenciya nauk i texnologij i formirovanie novoj noosfery` // Rossijskie nanotexnologii. 2011. T.6. № 9–10. S. 12.
5. 5. Koval`chuk M. V., Narajkin O. S., Yacishina E. B. Konvergenciya nauk i texnologij — novy`j e`tap nauchno-texnicheskogo razvitiya // Voprosy` filosofii. 2013. № 3. S. 3–11.
6. 6. Koval`chuk M. V., Xolodny`j Yu. I. Nekotory`e teoreticheskie aspekty` texnologii issledovanij s primeneniem poligrafa (stat`ya tret`ya) // Rassledovanie prestuplenij: problemy` i puti ix reshenij. 2021. № 3 (33). C. 85–90.
7. 7. Moiseeva T. F. Ot sostavitelej // Teoreticheskie i prikladny`e aspekty` ispol`zovaniya special`ny`x znanij v ugolovnom i grazhdanskom sudoproizvodstve: sb. statej. Vy`p. 4. M.: RGUP, 2020. S. 7–12.
8. 8. Nikitin V. V. Obzor praktiki proizvodstva PFI v sisteme SK RF s yanvarya 2017 goda po dekabr` 2019 goda // Teoreticheskie i prikladny`e aspekty` ispol`zovaniya special`ny`x znanij v ugolovnom i grazhdanskom sudoproizvodstve: sb. statej. Vy`p. 4. M.: RGUP, 2020. S. 118–126.
9. 9. Federal`naya nauchno-texnicheskaya programma issledovanij mozga na 2021–2029 gg. (Proekt). M.: RAN, 2020. 51 s.
10. 10. Fesenko A. V. Poryadok podgotovki specialistov po oprosam s ispol`zovaniem poligrafa (poligrafologov): Standart Rossijskogo agentstva e`konomicheskoj bezopasnosti i upravleniya riskami TPP Rossii (STO RAE`BUR 51-01-99; Gos. reg. № 844268 ot 9.02.1999) / A. V. Fesenko [i dr.] / M.: Gosstandart Rossii, 1999. 12 s.
11. 11. Fesenko A. V., Xolodny`j Yu. I. i dr. Poryadok provedeniya oprosov s ispol`zovaniem poligrafa: Standart Rossijskogo agentstva e`konomicheskoj bezopasnosti i upravleniya riskami TPP Rossii (STO RAE`BUR 51-02-99; Gos. reg. № 844276 ot 15.04.1999) / A. V. Fesenko [i dr.] / M.: Gosstandart Rossii, 1999. 16 s.
12. 12. Xabrieva T. Ya. Predislovie // Pravo i zakon v programmiruemom obshhestve: sbornik nauchny`x statej. M.: IZSP pri Pravitel`stve RF, 2020. S. 19–20.
13. 13. Xolodny`j Yu. I. Primenenie poligrafa pri profilaktike, raskry`tii i rassledovanii prestuplenij: monografiya. M.: Mir bezopasnosti, 2000. 157 s.
14. 14. Xolodny`j Yu. I., Saviczkij M. A., Nikolaev A. Yu. Problemy` metodicheskogo obespecheniya e`kspertizy` s primeneniem poligrafa // Razvitie kriminalistiki i sudebnoj e`kspertizy` v trudax prof. E. R. Rossinskoj: mat-ly Mezhdunar. nauch.-prakt. konf. M.: Prospekt, 2019. S. 472–478.
15. 15. Xolodny`j Yu. I. Vozmozhnosti i nereshenny`e voprosy` psixofiziologicheskix issledovanij s primeneniem poligrafa pri rassledovanii ugolovny`x del // Teoreticheskie i prikladny` e aspekty` ispol`zovaniya special`ny`x znanij v ugolovnom i grazhdanskom sudoproizvodstve. Vy`p. 4. M.: RGUP, 2020. S. 159–168.
16. 16. Xolodny`j Yu. I. Izuchenie nejrokognitivny`x processov v paradigme sokry`tiya informacii / Yu. I. Xolodny`j [i dr.] // E`ksperimental`naya psixologiya. 2021. T. 14. № 3. S. 17–39.
17. 17. Xolodny`j Yu. I. Kriminalisticheskaya psixofiziologiya // Psixofiziologiya / pod red. Yu. I. Aleksandrova. 5-e izd. SPb.: Piter, 2022. S. 481–510.
18. 18. Farah M. J. et al. Functional MRI-based lie detection: scientific and societal challenges // Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 2014. V. 15 (2). P. 123–131.
19. 19. Gazzaniga M. S. What is cognitive neuroscience // A judge’s guide to neuroscience: a concise introduction. University of California. 2010. P. 2.
20. 20. Illes J. et al. Incidental findings in brain imaging research // Science. 2006. № 311. R. 783.
21. 21. Neuroscience and Law. Complicated Crossings and New Perspectives. Springer Nature Switzerland AG. 2020. 563 r.
22. 22. Rizzolatti G. Neuroscience, Today // Neuroscience and Law. Complicated Crossings and New Perspectives. Springer Nature Switzerland AG. 2020. P. vii.
23. 23. Shen F. X. The overlooked history of neurolaw // Fordhem Law Review, 2016. V. 85. № 2. P. 667–695.
24. 24. Taylor J. S., Harp J. A., Elliot T. Neuropsychologists and Neurolawyers // Neuropsychology. 1991. V. 5. № 4. P. 293–305.
25. 25. Wegmann H. Summary: Neurolaw in an International Comparison // International Neurolaw. A Comparative Analysis. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2012. P. 381–411.
Download file .pdf 257.57 kb