Consequences of different addiction perspectives on the assessment of criminal responsibility
<|begin_of_text|><|start_header_id|>system<|end_header_id|> You are a research archivist expert in dataset metadata. Answer the question truthfully.  <|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>user<|end_header_id|> Here is the Description of a dataset. Description:'Discussions on the conceptualization of addiction are ongoing, most commonly by presenting a dichotomy between the Brain Disease Model and the Choice Model. In practice, the debate may extend beyond the social sciences to the field of law. This study tests the consequences of presenting two different perspectives on addiction in criminal courts, by using vignettes of an addicted offender, who committed either a property or a violent offence. The vignettes were presented to 171 criminal law students and 109 public prosecutors from the Netherlands, who had to judge the degree of accountability (the Dutch insanity defence equivalence), the sentence length and recidivism risk of the offender. This study found that accountability was judged significantly lower when participants were presented with a neuroscientific perspective on addiction a' . Please return only a json list of at most 3 Keywords corresponding to the Description:.<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>assistant<|end_header_id|> {"Answer" : ["Addiction debate","Criminal responsibility","Neurolaw"]} <|eot_id|>
 Here is the Description of a dataset. Description:'Discussions on the conceptualization of addiction are ongoing, most commonly by presenting a dichotomy between the Brain Disease Model and the Choice Model. In practice, the debate may extend beyond the social sciences to the field of law. This study tests the consequences of presenting two different perspectives on addiction in criminal courts, by using vignettes of an addicted offender, who committed either a property or a violent offence. The vignettes were presented to 171 criminal law students and 109 public prosecutors from the Netherlands, who had to judge the degree of accountability (the Dutch insanity defence equivalence), the sentence length and recidivism risk of the offender. This study found that accountability was judged significantly lower when participants were presented with a neuroscientific perspective on addiction a' . Please return only a json list of at most 3 Keywords corresponding to the Description:.
Discussions on the conceptualization of addiction are ongoing, most commonly by presenting a dichotomy between the Brain Disease Model and the Choice Model. In practice, the debate may extend beyond the social sciences to the field of law. This study tests the consequences of presenting two different perspectives on addiction in criminal courts, by using vignettes of an addicted offender, who committed either a property or a violent offence. The vignettes were presented to 171 criminal law students and 109 public prosecutors from the Netherlands, who had to judge the degree of accountability (the Dutch insanity defence equivalence), the sentence length and recidivism risk of the offender. This study found that accountability was judged significantly lower when participants were presented with a neuroscientific perspective on addiction a
Addiction debate; Criminal responsibility; Neurolaw