"There is currently little research exploring neuroscience's public image. The mass media are the main vectors in the transmission of scientific research. To date, systematic analysis of neuroscience in the media has only addressed the area of media coverage of specific neurotechnologies such as fMRI, PET, and TMS (Racine et al., 2005,Racine et al., 2006,Racine et al., 2010). This research identified three emerging trends in media interpretations of neuroimaging. Neurorealism describes the use of neuroimages to make phenomena seem objective, offering visual proof that a subjective experience (e.g., love, pain, addiction) is a “real thing.” Neuroessentialism denotes depictions of the brain as the essence of a person, with the brain a synonym for concepts like person, self, or soul. Finally, neuropolicy captures the recruitment of neuroscience to support political or policy agendas."
"These studies provide intriguing data, but the exclusive focus on neurotechnologies restricts their scope. To be included in the analysis, media articles had to contain quite technical terms like fMRI or PET: the research therefore overlooked articles that discussed brain research without naming specific technologies or that used lay terms for them (e.g., “brain scans”). Here, we consider how brain science, defined more generally, manifests in the mainstream media."
Matteo Cerri originally shared this post:
Neuroscientists and philosophers nowadays claim that the problem of phenomenal consciousness is a scientific problem. Increasing knowledge of the neural correlates of consciousness is expected to yiel…