Fooled by the brain: Re-examining the influence of neuroimages

Schweitzer, N. J.; Baker, Denise A.; Risko, Evan F.

doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2013.08.009

Cited by 42 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At the same time, our results also question the general ‘seductive allure of neuroscience explanations’ (Weisberg et al, , p. 470) and imply that findings from the general literature about the effects of neuroscience information (Weisberg et al, ) have to be reconsidered accordingly. In fact, our study is in contrast with Weisberg et al () and more consistent with very recent research that found no effects of neuroimages (e.g., Hook & Farah, ; Schweitzer, Baker, & Risko, ). The differential results of our study suggest that experience and training background play an important role in the decision process, at least concerning the influence of neuroscience information as part of the promotion strategy.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

The Role of Neuroscience Information in Choosing a Personality Test: Not as seductive as expected

Diekmann

König

Alles

2015

Int J Selection Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a large number of different personality tests used by practitioners for selection purposes, many of which are promoted by commercial test publishers and do not measure the Big Five. The present study examined one particular promotion factor used by at least one successful personality test: the influence of a link between the brain and personality on the decision for or against a personality test. This factor was chosen as past research has demonstrated the seductive appeal of neuroscience information on judgments in other areas. Three samples consisting of human resource practitioners, business management students, and psychology students rated two versions of a fictitious personality test, one with neuroscience information and one without. Contrary to our expectations, the personality test with neuroscience information was rated more negatively than the same test without this information. Human resource practitioners in particular reacted negatively, whereas psychology students were not influenced by our manipulation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

The Role of Neuroscience Information in Choosing a Personality Test: Not as seductive as expected

Diekmann

König

Alles

2015

Int J Selection Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A seminal study showed that displaying colorful renderings from brain scans, relative to simple bar graphs or plain text, led individuals to attribute more scientific merit to cognitive research (McCabe and Castel, 2008). Thereafter, however, some accounts questioned the import of these initial findings (Farah and Hook, 2013)—citing shortcomings in the original methodology and inability to replicate (Baker et al, 2013; Hook and Farah, 2013; Michael et al, 2013; Schweitzer et al, 2013). And yet, the quality of brain images may mediate their sway over critical reasoning: compared to tame graphical representations of the brain, images that were more three-dimensional and tangible increased the perceived quality of neuroscience information (Keehner et al, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Empirical neuroenchantment: from reading minds to thinking critically

Ali

Lifshitz

Raz

2014

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While most experts agree on the limitations of neuroimaging, the unversed public—and indeed many a scholar—often valorizes brain imaging without heeding its shortcomings. Here we test the boundaries of this phenomenon, which we term neuroenchantment. How much are individuals ready to believe when encountering improbable information through the guise of neuroscience? We introduced participants to a crudely-built mock brain scanner, explaining that the machine would measure neural activity, analyze the data, and then infer the content of complex thoughts. Using a classic magic trick, we crafted an illusion whereby the imaging technology seemed to decipher the internal thoughts of participants. We found that most students—even undergraduates with advanced standing in neuroscience and psychology, who have been taught the shortcomings of neuroimaging—deemed such unlikely technology highly plausible. Our findings highlight the influence neuro-hype wields over critical thinking.

show abstract

“…For a lay audience, studies have shown that neuroscience research is judged to be more scientifically credible [78] and more understandable [79] when it is accompanied by brain images rather than by bar graphs or more abstract topographical maps. Although other studies fail to replicate a general effect of neuroimagery on scientific persuasiveness [80,81], there appear to be at least some limited contexts [82] in which neuroimagery does add gravitas to scientific arguments. In light of results showing that imagery depicting the 3D geometric structure of a brain (e.g., Figure 6B) is more scientifically convincing than a flattened topographic map (e.g., Figure 6D) for lay audiences [83], one conjecture is that lay audiences are naively interpreting the 3D, object-like depictions as directly capturing and displaying brain activity [8,9].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%