Searching for the Social in the Brain: The Emergence of Social Neuroscience

Matusall, Svenja

doi:10.3929/ethz-a-009753077

Cited by 1 publication

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The strong feelings of outrage generated by the comments of Vul and colleagues soon gave way to a lively methodological debate concerning fMRI data analysis practices. The "Voodoo" article had an earthshaking effect (Poldrack et al 2011), generating panic in the scientific community (Matusall 2012), which affected neuroscientists so strongly that it generated shockwaves in related areas beyond the issue of overstated correlations that was initially emphasized by Vul and colleagues.…”

Section: Conclusion: When Controversy Becomes a Methodological Crisismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This preliminary dissemination continued until the article's publication in May 2009, with the article being mentioned by blogs such as Discover Magazine's Neuroskeptic (Neuroskeptic 2009) and Stanford Law School (Greely), as well as by magazines such as Seed (Bardin), Wired (Saini), and Sciences Humaines (Marmion 2009). Finally, in 2012, neuroscientist Daniel S. Margulies (2012), sociologist Svenja Matusall (2012), and historian Cornelius Borck (2013) traced the history of the "Voodoo" article. A total of 12 magazine articles, albeit no print media articles, transmitted the work of Vul and colleagues.…”

Section: Birth and Mediatization Of A Controversymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, in addition to this media coverage, which was perceived to be disproportionate and alarmist (Lindquist and Gelman 2009), the "Voodoo" article provoked a "firestorm" (Poldrack et al 2011, p. 184) throughout the neuroscientific community as early as January 2009. This intense diffusion in scientific circles was the sign of a "substantial controversy" (Diener 2009, p. 272) that became particularly heated for several weeks (Matusall 2012).…”

Section: Protest By Neuroscientistsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite this change, the tone of the article and its "pointed attack on social neuroscience" (Lieberman et al 2009b, p. 299) remained unpopular with social neuroscientists (Matusall 2012). These neuroscientists felt so attacked in terms of their practice, character, and reputation (Matusall 2012) that they responded on blogs and via online texts as early as January 2009 (Gelman 2009;Jabbi et al 2009;Lieberman et al 2009a), as well as in an article published by the journal PoPS in May 2009.…”

Section: Protest By Neuroscientistsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

“Voodoo” Science in Neuroimaging: How a Controversy Transformed into a Crisis

Sauvayre

2022

Social Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the 1990s, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) techniques have continued to advance, which has led researchers and non specialists alike to regard this technique as infallible. However, at the end of 2008, a scientific controversy and the related media coverage called functional neuroimaging practices into question and cast doubt on the capacity of fMRI studies to produce reliable results. The purpose of this article is to retrace the history of this contemporary controversy and its treatment in the media. Then, the study stands at the intersection of the history of science, the epistemology of statistics, and the epistemology of science. Arguments involving actors (researchers, the media) and the chronology of events are presented. Finally, the article reveals that three groups fought through different arguments (false positives, statistical power, sample size, etc.), reaffirming the current scientific norms that separate the true from the false. Replication, forming this boundary, takes the place of the most persuasive argument. This is how the voodoo controversy joined the replication crisis.

show abstract

Section: Conclusion: When Controversy Becomes a Methodological Crisismentioning

confidence: 99%