Chapter 17

Public Perceptions of Neuroscience

The general public has a strong interest in cognitive neuroscience because of its
potential relevance to their own lives in both health and disease and its interface with
such areas as education, law, business, and technology.

Nonexperts in neuroscience may sometimes be misled by the “seductive allure” of

findings about the brain, believing those findings to be more definitive than they really
are. The need for critical thinking about neuroscience findings is paramount.
• Even undergraduate Neuro students “tricked” by superfluous brain info;
although neuroscience grad students and postdocs were not.

Some studies suggest that brain images are especially influential in persuading people
due to their vivid and seemingly concrete representation of complex mental processes.

Neuroscience and Education

Cognitive neuroscience and education are natural partners, as neuroscience provides
information about the neural basis of cognitive skills that are developed through
education.

Cognitive Neuroscience provides a framework for understanding the mechanisms that

sustain learning, memory, and reasoning.

Opportunity #1: Use our insight into the neural bases of cognitive skills, and increase the
effectiveness of programs and teachers.

1
Example: Reading ability
• Literacy is crucial in modern society; those with reading difficulties are
significantly held back
• Children with early reading difficulties read less, which further exacerbates the
gap between them and their peers (Mol and Bus, 2011).
• Dyslexia: 10% of children are affected.

Finding: Risk factors for dyslexia can be measured before children begin reading.
• Gaps in N1 neural response to Words vs Symbols predicts performance in pre-
reading kindergarteners (Bach et al., 2013)
• The neural measures can predict future reading skill better than behavioral
measures.
• Can we use these measures to funnel children into early-intervention programs?
Practicality Concerns:
• Do schools have funding for this?
• Should a student be branded as high-risk before they try to read?

Classroom demonstrations can help teachers and students learn about the brain and
dispel “neuro-myths.” Learning about the brain in early years can promote children’s
belief in their ability to get smarter if they try.

Findings from cognitive neuroscience can illuminate specific areas of application in

education, including development of skills in math, reading, and special needs
instruction.

One specific area of application is in understanding how the brain supports reading.
Studies of the neural basis of dyslexia suggest that some of the neural differences
associated with reading difficulties exist in pre-kindergarten years, before children begin
learning to read. Neural measures taken during language tasks in preschoolers can
predict which children will have more difficulty learning to read in the elementary school
years, suggesting possible paths for early intervention.

Neuroscience and Social Inequality

• The deck is stacked biologically and cognitively against children who come from
impoverished backgrounds.
• Two primary paths are proposed:
– Linguistic Environment: Children in Low-SES homes tend to get lower
quantity and quality of language input.
– Stress: Higher adversity, traumatic events, food insecurity, etc.
– Not mutually exclusive, and not accounting for other effects such as
nutrition, sleep, pollution, chaotic environment, etc.

Children of lower socioeconomic status (SES) are at risk for lower academic
achievement, which perpetuates inequality across generations. SES-related differences
in cognitive skills during childhood, particularly in domains of language and executive
functions, are paralleled by structural and functional differences in brain development.

2
Various causal explanations for the SES-related differences have been proposed, and
they are not mutually exclusive. One explanation focuses on language use in the home,
positing that enriched linguistic complexity in the home could account for the
advantages in high-SES children at even a young age.

Another possible causal path involves the influence of environmental stress on the
developing brain. The stressors associated with poverty and other early adversities can
affect the developing brain, particularly in frontal lobe regions that are important in both
executive functions and language development.

Interventions to address SES gaps in cognition and related aspects of brain development
have focused both on school-based programs that attempt to strengthen children’s self-
control abilities and on family-based programs that include parent training in managing
stress within the home environment.

Structural MRI: SES-related reductions in cortical thickness in the left inferior frontal
gyrus and right anterior cingulate cortex, regions involved in executive control. (Lawson
et al., 2003)

“In a study that assessed both anatomical differences and standardized test
performance…lags in the anatomical development of frontal and temporal regions
accounted for about one fifth of the group differences in test performance.” (Book
summary of Hair et al., 2015)

Questions
Is this a neuroscience problem?
Are there neuroscientific solutions?
#1:
We can observe the problem with our neuroscientific methods.
We can describe the underlying brain chemistry and anatomy.
• Role of neuromodulators / stress hormones
• Impact of under-stimulating linguistic environments
#2:
Interventions combatting the effects of Social Inequality may be informed by
neuroscience. But ultimately, the solutions to this extremely large issue aren’t likely to
come from neuroscience.

3
Neuroscience and the Law
Culpability: Degree to which a person is held responsible for an action.
– Voluntary vs involuntary crimes Neurological determinism:
Are you controlled by your brain?
Their “Bad Brain” made them do it.
We all have urges and emotions to varying degrees, and varying abilities for top-down
regulation. "An emotion is an urge or tendency to behave in a certain way"

Since law involves the societal regulation of human behavior, scientific findings about
the neural basis of cognition and behavior, particularly in areas such as decision making,
have potential implications for the law.

The concept of evidence is different in the law versus science, accounting for some
challenges when these disciplines intersect. Scientists think probabilistically and are
expected to present all relevant evidence. Juries in the courtroom are often presented
with selective evidence – that which attorneys opt to present in support of their case –
and juries and judges are asked to make definitive rather than probabilistic judgments.

One area in which neuroscience has affected legal thinking is in the area of adolescent
brain development. Cognitive neuroscience studies indicate a protracted course of brain
development and cognitive abilities extending into late adolescence and early
adulthood, particularly in areas of impulse control and decision making. These findings
have implications for whether juveniles should be legally held to the same standards as
adults.

More generally, the issue of culpability – how responsible a person is for his or her
actions – is an issue on which neuroscience evidence may be relevant. However,
neuroscience evidence cannot at the present time be used to determine definitively
whether a particular person has a “bad brain” that reduces culpability.

Despite attempts to understand the neural mechanisms that contribute to the cognitive
act of lying, neural measures of lie detection are not currently admissible as evidence in
any US court. Difficulties in generalizing from controlled, artificial lab experiments of
deception to real-world criminal contexts, combined with low accuracy of current brain-
based lie detection meth “ods, have been the key challenges in developing biological
measures of deception that could be used in a courtroom.

Adolescents
Consider:
“The development of the brain is more protracted than we had assumed a decade ago,
with…white-matter expansion continuing into the middle 20s. These data alone suggest
that the brain is not yet fully developed in youth, which likely provides opportunity for
future growth and rehabilitation.”

These impacts are greatest in areas associated with impulse control and decision making
(DLPFC, and related frontal lobe control regions).

4
Social Factors: Adolescents have greater activity in reward-related regions when they
play a “risky” driving video game with a friend than when playing alone. This effect isn’t
observed in adults (Chein et al., 2011)

Should adolescents have less legal culpability compared to adults?

Do they have a “diminished capacity”, by virtue of their neuropsychological immaturity?

Neuroscience and Performance Optimization

Opportunity #1: Use neuro methods to improve performance where lives are at stake.
People we don’t want sleeping on the job:
• Military
• Commercial Pilots
• Surgeons
Applicable Methods
• Pharmacological (Stimulants – Methylphenidate, modafinil; coffee)
• Monitor for suboptimal mental states, such as drowsiness
– Brain Machine Interfaces: EEG is most portable.
– fMRI can be used for brain training purposes
Opportunity #2:
Use neuroscientific methods to improve the brains of normally-functioning, healthy
people.
“Cosmetic neurology”

Recent studies have focused on whether cognitive performance can be enhanced in

healthy humans through biological manipulations. Enhancement in attention, vigilance,
target detection, perceptual processing, learning, and memory could be relevant to
high-performance occupations such as aviation and the military.

Biological manipulations of cognitive performance have traditionally included

pharmacological manipulations, such as stimulant drugs. More recently, research has
focused on the potentially beneficial effects on cognition of magnetic or electrical
stimulation, such as through TMS or tDCS. Some studies have found evidence of
improvements in attention, learning, and memory with such stimulation in healthy
volunteers.

Advances in computational methods have allowed for the real-time, instantaneous

extraction of biofeedback in the form of EEG or fMRI signals. Such real-time data can be
used to monitor a person’s brain, for example to trigger warnings when drowsiness sets
in, and to train people to control their brain activity in response to the real-time
feedback, with potentially beneficial consequences for cognitive performance.

Computational advances have also allowed real-time extraction of brain signals, such as
from implanted electrodes and even noninvasive fMRI signals, to control external
devices such as robotic arms or cursors on a computer. The ability of thoughts to control
devices via neural measurement can even be extended to remote devices.

5
Ethical issues arise when developing technology to improve the functioning and reach
of the healthy brain. Both beneficial and malevolent consequences of technology must
be considered. Ethical issues include possibility of implicit or explicit coercion,
particularly in employment or military settings, and the perpetuation of social
inequalities.

Implications
Ethical Implications of for-profit “Brain Training”:
Widens the inequality gap, if only rich people can afford it.
• Or, can we use it to fight the inequality gap?
Creates an “Arms Race” – If your coworker is training their brain, won’t you have to do
it, to keep up?
Preys on the “seductive allure” of brain science.
• Monetizing Neuro expertise, which we suspect the average person over-values /
misunderstands.
• False promises or unrealistic expectations –> Predatory behavior

Neuroscience and the Marketplace

“Neuro-marketing” refers to the use of neuroscience information, in addition to
traditional surveys and focus groups, to aid marketers in connecting their products with
consumers who are willing to buy them.

Same wine, different reaction:

Activity in the medial orbitofrontal cortex was affected by a wine’s fictitious price.
However, activity in the primary taste regions was not.
Implication: Hedonic value coded by the OFC.

While neuroscience information can give insight about neural mechanisms of the
representation of value and willingness to pay, it is doubtful whether information gained
about particular products would be worth the cost of neuroimaging to marketers.

The orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) has been identified as most relevant to predicting a
participant’s likelihood of buying a product. The OFC’s activity is altered by factors that

6
affect a person’s liking of a product (e.g., stated price) and is correlated with how much
a person agrees to pay for a product.

Neuroscience and the marketplace also intersect in the phenomenon of “brain

branding,” which refers to selling products by linking them to neural concepts (e.g.,
“brain training” programs for the elderly). Such branding, sometimes used even when
no neuroscience evidence actually supports the product, takes advantage of the appeal
of neuroscience to the general public.

The Neuroscience of Morality

Cognitive Neuroscience can help describe the neural processes of morality, but can’t
make any normative claims about how moral dilemmas should be resolved.

Morality most likely evolved in response to selective pressures derived from group living
in social primates. Other primate species exhibit a rudimentary sense of fairness, in that
they react negatively when treated less well than others.

A sense of justice implies expecting fair treatment of others even when it contradicts
self-interest. Neural mechanisms of empathy may serve as a basis for understanding the
experiences of others, thereby promoting pro-social behavior. However, neural
empathic responses are biased toward favored others, implying that empathy alone
may not support the motivation for fairness toward all. The ability to take the cognitive
perspective of another may be more relevant in supporting justice motivations.

Reasoning about moral dilemmas recruits brain regions involved in complex decision
making, such as anterior cingulate, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, and orbitofrontal
cortex. Different subsets of brain regions are involved in representing the emotional
value of a morally “good or bad” action versus the utilitarian value (costs and benefits
to society), and medial OFC may serve to integrate these factors together into an overall
moral judgment.

Scientific data can help us to understand how various societal or individual actions may
harm the brain, adding information that contributes to moral judgments about those
actions. However, neuroscience studies of the process of reasoning during moral
dilemmas cannot ultimately tell individuals or society how those moral dilemmas should
be resolved.