Radically reframing studies on neurobiology and socioeconomic circumstances: A call for social justice-oriented neuroscience

Abstract

Socioeconomic circumstances are associated with symptoms and diagnostic status of nearly all mental health conditions. Given these robust relationships, neuroscientists have attempted to elucidate how socioeconomic-based adversity “gets under the skin.” Historically, this work emphasized individual proxies of socioeconomic position (e.g., income, education), ignoring the effects of broader socioeconomic contexts (e.g., neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage) which may uniquely contribute to chronic stress. This omission represented a disconnect between neuroscience and other allied fields that have recognized health is undeniably linked to interactions between systems of power and individual characteristics. More recently, neuroscience work has considered how sociopolitical context affects brain structure and function; however, the products of this exciting line of research have lacked critical sociological and historical perspectives. While empirical evidence on this topic is burgeoning, the cultural, ethical, societal, and legal implications of this work have been elusive. Although the mechanisms by which socioeconomic circumstances impact brain structure and function may be similar across people, not everyone is exposed to these factors at similar rates. Individuals from ethnoracially minoritized groups are disproportionally exposed to neighborhood disadvantage. Thus, socioeconomic inequities examined in neuroscience research are undergirding with other forms of oppression, namely structural racism. We utilize a holistic, interdisciplinary approach to interpret findings from neuroscience research and interweave relevant theories from the fields of public health, social sciences, and Black feminist thought. In this perspective piece, we discuss the complex relationship that continues to exist between academic institutions and underserved surrounding communities, acknowledging the areas in which neuroscience research has historically harmed and/or excluded structurally disadvantaged communities. We conclude by envisioning how this work can be used; not just to inform policymakers, but also to engage and partner with communities and shape the future direction of human neuroscience research.

Five recommendations for using large-scale publicly available data to advance health among American Indian peoples: the Adolescent Brain and Cognitive Development (ABCD) StudySM as an illustrative case

“…Thus, inappropriate research using large-scale open access data may exacerbate resource inequities resultant from public policy decisions. Moreover, it has been repeatedly demonstrated that inappropriate research promulgates negative stereotypes [43,45,51,52] that are associated with harm psychological consequences for AIAN people [53,54]. (3) Facilitate community engagement at each stage of the research process: CBPR [38] approaches represent the gold standard research method in AIAN communities.…”

A call to leverage a health equity lens to accelerate human neuroscience research

“…Moving the needle in human neurosciences will need intentional and collaborative effort to effectively avoid epistemic injustices, apply a SDoH lens, and address counterfactuals and confounding variables as they arise in our own neuroscience research ( Carter et al, 2022 ). Along with these two key tenets of health equity and the growing literature ( Carter et al, 2022 ; Girolamo et al, 2022 ; Green et al, 2022 ; Ricard et al, 2022 ; Webb et al, 2022 ) that call to expand our understanding of how larger contextualizing structural factors drive persistent brain health inequities, human neuroscience has the potential to move the needle toward authentic justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion, while also accelerating our pursuit to study the human brain.…”

“…The present perspective presents a call for significantly more attention toward leveraging a health equity lens in human neuroscience research. In doing so, we hope to contribute to the growing literature that echoes this call ( Ricard et al, 2022 ; Webb et al, 2022 ; La Scala et al, 2023 ). Once a critical mass sharing these goals among neuroscientists is achieved, we believe a new era of accelerated understanding of the human brain will follow, creating a novel path divergent from the exclusionary practices in scientific history ( Rutherford, 2021b ).…”

Family- and neighborhood-level environmental associations with physical health conditions in 9- and 10-year-olds.

“…For several reasons, we made the conscious decision to exclude race and ethnicity as factors in our analyses (Webb et al, 2022). Our research question asked how associations between environmental factors and physical health conditions were moderated by family-level SES.…”