OBJECTIVES It is difficult to "prove" pain and suffering-particularly emotional suffering. Neuroimaging technology might bolster pain claims in civil cases by making pain seem less subjective. We examined how neuroimaging of physical and emotional pain influences judgments of pain and suffering across nonlegal and legal contexts. HYPOTHESES We hypothesized that participants would rate pain assessed using neuroimaging as more severe and award higher compensation than pain assessed using self-report measures. We also hypothesized that participants would rate physical (vs. emotional) pain as more severe, except when the pain claim was bolstered by a neuroimaging assessment. METHOD In two experiments, we tested how pain assessment techniques influence perceptions of pain severity and monetary compensation differently for physical or emotional pain. Using a within-subjects design, participants (Experiment 1, N = 411, 59% male, 80% White) read 6 vignettes that described a person's chronic physical or emotional pain, evaluated using a clinical assessment, neuropsychological assessment, or neuroimaging assessment. We conceptually replicated Experiment 1 in a legal context (Experiment 2, N = 353, 42% male; 80% White) and tested whether the neuroimaging effect was due to knowing that the pain was assessed by neuroimaging or also required the inclusion of a neuroimage. RESULTS When pain was assessed using neuroimaging (vs. non-neuroimaging assessments), participants rated the pain as more severe and gave larger monetary awards. When a person alleged physical (vs. emotional) pain, participants rated the pain as more severe and gave larger monetary awards. We conceptually replicated these findings in Experiment 2 and found that the neuroimaging effect was due to hearing about neuroimaging assessment and did not necessitate the inclusion of a neuroimage. CONCLUSION Neuroimaging technology could be extremely useful for plaintiffs trying to overcome the difficult hurdle of proving their pain. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

神经影像学可以证明疼痛和痛苦吗？：疼痛评估技术对身体疼痛和情感疼痛的法律判断的影响。

目标 “证明”痛苦和痛苦——尤其是情感上的痛苦——是很困难的。神经影像技术可能会让疼痛显得不那么主观，从而支持民事案件中的疼痛索赔。我们研究了身体和情感疼痛的神经影像如何影响非法律和法律背景下的疼痛和痛苦的判断。假设我们假设参与者会认为使用神经影像学评估的疼痛比使用自我报告措施评估的疼痛更严重，并给予更高的补偿。我们还假设参与者会将身体（与情感）疼痛评为更严重，除非疼痛声明得到神经影像学评估的支持。方法 在两个实验中，我们测试了疼痛评估技术如何影响对疼痛严重程度的感知以及对身体或情感疼痛的不同金钱补偿。使用受试者内部设计，参与者（实验 1，N = 411，59% 男性，80% 白人）阅读 6 个小插图，描述一个人的慢性身体或情感痛苦，并使用临床评估、神经心理学评估或神经影像学评估进行评估。我们在法律背景下概念性地重复实验 1（实验 2，N = 353，42% 男性；80% 白人），并测试神经影像效果是否是由于知道疼痛是通过神经影像评估的，或者还需要包含神经影像。结果当使用神经影像学评估疼痛（与非神经影像学评估相比）时，参与者认为疼痛更严重，并给予更大的金钱奖励。当一个人声称身体（相对于情感）疼痛时，参与者会认为疼痛更严重，并给予更多的金钱奖励。我们在实验 2 中概念性地复制了这些发现，发现神经影像效果是由于听到了神经影像评估而产生的，并不需要包含神经影像。结论 神经影像技术对于试图克服证明其痛苦的困难障碍的原告来说非常有用。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2021 APA，保留所有权利）。