About

Adina L. Roskies is a professor of Philosophy at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and is affiliated with the Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences. She received a Ph.D. in Neuroscience and Cognitive Science from the University of California, San Diego in 1995, a Ph.D. in Philosophy from MIT in 2004, and an M.S.L. from Yale Law School in 2014. Her philosophical research interests lie at the intersection of philosophy and neuroscience, including philosophy of mind, philosophy of science, and ethics. She has held a postdoctoral fellowship in cognitive neuroimaging at Washington University and was Senior Editor of the neuroscience journal Neuron. Dr. Roskies has been involved in projects such as the McDonnell Project in Neurophilosophy and the MacArthur Law and Neuroscience Project. Her awards include the William James Prize, the Stanton Prize from the Society of Philosophy and Psychology, a Mellon New Directions Fellowship, and the Laurance S. Rockerfeller Visiting Faculty Fellowship from the Princeton University Center for Human Values. She is also a coauthor of the book 'A Primer on Criminal Law and Neuroscience' with Stephen Morse.

Research topics

• Computer Science
• Psychology
• Neuroscience
• Cognitive science
• Epistemology
• Artificial Intelligence
• Philosophy
• Cognitive psychology
• Engineering
• Thermodynamics
• Geography
• Meteorology
• Mathematics
• Mechanical engineering
• Psychoanalysis
• Physics

Selected publications

• Commentary on Gallagher’s “Causal Interaction and Heterogeneous Integration in Level-Free Psychiatry”

  Cambridge University Press eBooks · 2026-05-11

  book-chapter1st authorCorresponding
  PublisherDOI

• Research on Brain Organoids Should Prioritize Questions of Agency, Not Consciousness

  AJOB Neuroscience · 2026-04-03

  article1st authorCorresponding
  PublisherDOI

• Agency as a Framework for Thinking about Neuropsychiatric Disease

  Cambridge University Press eBooks · 2026-05-11

  book-chapter1st authorCorresponding
  PublisherDOI

• The evolutionary functions of consciousness

  Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2025-11-13 · 2 citations

  articleOpen accessSenior author

  did consciousness evolve? Assuming that some species (e.g. humans) have consciousness and others (e.g. redwoods or mushrooms) do not, what problem(s) did consciousness evolve to solve? From a biological and evolutionary viewpoint, and regardless of which species have consciousness (or to what degree), this question of the adaptive function(s) of consciousness is central. Nonetheless, the growing discipline of consciousness studies has not yet fully engaged with this issue. The current special issue aims to help fill this important gap in the literature with contributions from 28 noted scholars in the field. In this introduction, we discuss basic terminological issues and potential pitfalls, provide a broad theoretical framework, consider some of the many possible answers to this central question and offer brief summaries of the included papers.This article is part of the theme issue 'Evolutionary functions of consciousness'.

  PublisherDOI

• Moral Motivation

  Cambridge University Press eBooks · 2025-02-20

  book-chapterSenior author
  PublisherDOI

• Covert Consciousness: Epistemic Limits of Its Definition and Detection

  Neurocritical Care · 2025-10-30 · 2 citations

  article
  PublisherDOI

• The misalignment of incentives in academic publishing and implications for journal reform

  Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2025-01-27 · 39 citations

  articleOpen access

  For most researchers, academic publishing serves two goals that are often misaligned-knowledge dissemination and establishing scientific credentials. While both goals can encourage research with significant depth and scope, the latter can also pressure scholars to maximize publication metrics. Commercial publishing companies have capitalized on the centrality of publishing to the scientific enterprises of knowledge dissemination and academic recognition to extract large profits from academia by leveraging unpaid services from reviewers, creating financial barriers to research dissemination, and imposing substantial fees for open access. We present a set of perspectives exploring alternative models for communicating and disseminating scientific research. Acknowledging that the success of new publishing models depends on their impact on existing approaches for assigning academic credit that often prioritize prestigious publications and metrics such as citations and impact factors, we also provide various viewpoints on reforming academic evaluation.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• How should the advancement of large language models affect the practice of science?

  Universität Zürich, ZORA · 2025-01-27

  articleOpen access

  Large language models (LLMs) are being increasingly incorporated into scientific workflows. However, we have yet to fully grasp the implications of this integration. How should the advancement of large language models affect the practice of science? For this opinion piece, we have invited four diverse groups of scientists to reflect on this query, sharing their perspectives and engaging in debate. Schulz et al. make the argument that working with LLMs is not fundamentally different from working with human collaborators, while Bender et al. argue that LLMs are often misused and overhyped, and that their limitations warrant a focus on more specialized, easily interpretable tools. Marelli et al. emphasize the importance of transparent attribution and responsible use of LLMs. Finally, Botvinick and Gershman advocate that humans should retain responsibility for determining the scientific roadmap. To facilitate the discussion, the four perspectives are complemented with a response from each group. By putting these different perspectives in conversation, we aim to bring attention to important considerations within the academic community regarding the adoption of LLMs and their impact on both current and future scientific practices.

  PublisherDOI

• The Case Against Free Will

  Scientific American · 2025-09-01

  article1st authorCorresponding
  PublisherDOI

• How should the advancement of large language models affect the practice of science?

  Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2025-01-27 · 47 citations

  articleOpen access

  Large language models (LLMs) are being increasingly incorporated into scientific workflows. However, we have yet to fully grasp the implications of this integration. How should the advancement of large language models affect the practice of science? For this opinion piece, we have invited four diverse groups of scientists to reflect on this query, sharing their perspectives and engaging in debate. Schulz et al. make the argument that working with LLMs is not fundamentally different from working with human collaborators, while Bender et al. argue that LLMs are often misused and overhyped, and that their limitations warrant a focus on more specialized, easily interpretable tools. Marelli et al. emphasize the importance of transparent attribution and responsible use of LLMs. Finally, Botvinick and Gershman advocate that humans should retain responsibility for determining the scientific roadmap. To facilitate the discussion, the four perspectives are complemented with a response from each group. By putting these different perspectives in conversation, we aim to bring attention to important considerations within the academic community regarding the adoption of LLMs and their impact on both current and future scientific practices.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

Recent grants

• Assessing the Effects of Deep Brain Stimulation on Agency

  NIH · $1.3M · 2018–2023

Frequent coauthors

• Colin Allen

  New York University Press

  247 shared

• William Bechtel

  University of California, San Diego

  245 shared

• David Papineau

  King's College London

  245 shared

• Sandra D. Mitchell

  University of Exeter

  245 shared

• Robert W. Batterman

  University of California, San Diego

  245 shared

• S. P. Robins

  New York University Press

  245 shared

• Mazviita Chirimuuta

  University of Edinburgh

  245 shared

• Chris Smeenk

  University of Edinburgh

  245 shared

Awards & honors

• William James Prize
• Stanton Prize
• Mellon New Directions Fellowship
• Laurance S. Rockerfeller Visiting Faculty Fellowship from th…