"We found that supporting a specific theory [of consciousness] can be predicted solely from methodological choices, irrespective of findings." https://t.co/yWSo6rETQM
— Àlex Gómez-Marín (@behaviOrganisms) March 9, 2022
Abstract of the linked article:
Understanding how consciousness arises from neural activity remains one
of the biggest challenges for neuroscience. Numerous theories have been
proposed in recent years, each gaining independent empirical support.
Currently, there is no comprehensive, quantitative and theory-neutral
overview of the field that enables an evaluation of how theoretical
frameworks interact with empirical research. We provide a bird’s eye
view of studies that interpreted their findings in light of at least one
of four leading neuroscientific theories of consciousness (N = 412
experiments), asking how methodological choices of the researchers
might affect the final conclusions. We found that supporting a specific
theory can be predicted solely from methodological choices, irrespective
of findings. Furthermore, most studies interpret their findings post
hoc, rather than a priori testing critical predictions of the theories.
Our results highlight challenges for the field and provide researchers
with an open-access website (https://ContrastDB.tau.ac.il) to further analyse trends in the neuroscience of consciousness.
No comments:
Post a Comment