Lay Theories of Mind and Brain Diego Fernandez-­‐Duque Associate Professor Psychology Department Villanova University Lay Theories of Mind and Brain Lay Theories of Mind and Brain common-­‐sense beliefs A neuroscience explanaBon is a good explanaBon (the allure of neuroscience) The brain contributes to who we truly are ( the self is brain-­‐made) The Allure of Neuroscience Neuro-­‐jibberish increases the appeal of psychological explanaBons Past Research: Inconclusive 1. Brain images in neuroscience popular press arBcles à perceived quality (McCabe & Castel, 2008). But, -­‐  Brain image à neuro explanaBon, instead of: brain image à psych explanaBon -­‐  Failure to replicate. 2. Superfluous neuroscience text à perceived quality (Weisberg et al., 2008). But, -­‐  No Brain Image -­‐  ProblemaBc Method Circular explana?on: “the curse of knowledge happens because subjects make more mistakes when they have to judge the knowledge of others.” Circular explana?on with superfluous neuroscience informa?on: “the curse of knowledge happens because of the frontal lobe brain circuitry known to be involved in self-­‐knowledge. Subjects make more mistakes when they have to judge the knowledge of others.” Follow-­‐up to Weisberg’s study with improved methods 1. 
2. 
3. 
4. 
5. 
6. 
Title: ‘curse of knowledge’
Method: how to study it Results: findings Explana?on: why it happens Superfluous info: Judgment The psychological phenomenon Good, Circular None, Neuro, Neuro+image (0= very poor, 6 = very good) The Explana?on: The “curse of knowledge” happens because •  subjects make more mistakes when they have to judge the knowledge of others. People are much beaer at judging what they themselves know. (CIRCULAR) Brain scans indicate that self-­‐knowledge engages a neural circuitry in the frontal lobes. (NEUROSCIENCE INFORMATION – NOT RELEVANT) •  subjects have trouble switching their point of view to consider what someone else might know, mistakenly projecBng their own knowledge onto others. (TRUE EXPLANATION) Brain scans indicate that self-­‐
knowledge engages a neural circuitry in the frontal lobes. (NEUROSCIENCE INFORMATION – NOT RELEVANT) The Explana?on: The “curse of knowledge” happens because •  subjects make more mistakes when they have to judge the knowledge of others. People are much beaer at judging what they themselves know. (CIRCULAR) Brain scans indicate that self-­‐knowledge engages a neural circuitry in the frontal lobes. (NEUROSCIENCE INFORMATION – NOT RELEVANT) •  subjects have trouble switching their point of view to consider what someone else might know, mistakenly projecBng their own knowledge onto others. (TRUE EXPLANATION) Brain scans indicate that self-­‐
knowledge engages a neural circuitry in the frontal lobes. (NEUROSCIENCE INFORMATION – NOT RELEVANT) Figure: Three different views of the frontal lobe network involved in self-­‐knowledge The Explana?on is … ( 0= very poor; 6 = very good) None Neuro NeuroImage 5.5 5.0 4.5 4.0 5.0 3.5 3.0 4.4 4.4 4.2 3.4 2.5 Circular Explana?on •  Draw your predicBons!
Good 5.1 The Explana?on is … ( 0= very poor; 6 = very good) None Neuro NeuroImage 5.5 5.0 4.5 4.0 5.0 3.5 3.0 4.4 4.4 4.2 3.4 2.5 Circular Explana?on •  Draw your predicBons!
Good 5.1 The Explana?on is … ( 0= very poor; 6 = very good) None Neuro NeuroImage 5.5 5.0 4.5 4.0 5.0 3.5 3.0 4.4 4.4 4.2 3.4 2.5 Circular Good Explana?on •  Neuro-­‐jibberish effect •  Image provides no addiBonal benefit 5.1 The Explana?on: The “curse of knowledge” happens because •  subjects make more mistakes when they have to judge the knowledge of others. People are much beaer at judging what they themselves know. (CIRCULAR). Studies indicate that self-­‐knowledge develops jointly for individuals raised in inter-­‐dependent socie?es. (CULTURAL INFORMATION – NOT RELEVANT) •  subjects have trouble switching their point of view to consider what someone else might know, mistakenly projecBng their own knowledge onto others. (TRUE EXPLANATION). Studies indicate that self-­‐knowledge develops jointly for individuals raised in inter-­‐dependent socie?es. (CULTURAL INFORMATION – NOT RELEVANT) The Explana?on is … ( 0= very poor; 6 = very good) None Neuro Culture 5.50 5.00 4.50 4.00 4.98 3.50 3.00 4.26 3.70 4.57 4.73 3.90 2.50 Circular Good Explana?on Neurojibberish effect: -­‐  it’s real -­‐  does not generalize to the social sciences. Why? Because social science is not deemed real science Rate the scienBfic rigor, knowledge gap, and societal presBge of: Natural Sciences: Biology, Chemistry, GeneBcs Neuroscience Psychology Social Psychology Social Sciences: PoliBcal Science, Cultural Anthropology, Sociology AdmiraBon score Because social science is not deemed real science Rate the scienBfic rigor, knowledge gap, and societal presBge of: Natural Sciences: Neuroscience Psychology Social Social Sciences: Psychology PoliBcal Biology, Science Chemistry Cultural Anthropology GeneBcs Sociology AdmiraBon score 10
9
Admiration
8
7
9.33
8.71
6
7.03
6.21
5
5.56
4
NaturalSciences Neuroscience Psychology Social Psychology Social Sciences 10
9
Admiration
8
7
9.33
8.71
6
7.03
6.21
5
5.56
4
NaturalSciences Neuroscience Psychology Social Psychology Social Sciences 10
9
Admiration
8
7
9.33
8.71
6
7.03
6.21
5
5.56
4
NaturalSciences Neuroscience Psychology Social Psychology Social Sciences 10
9
Admiration
8
7
9.33
8.71
6
7.03
6.21
5
5.56
4
NaturalSciences Neuroscience Psychology Social Psychology Social Sciences The Explana?on: The “curse of knowledge” happens because •  subjects make more mistakes when they have to judge the knowledge of others. People are much beaer at judging what they themselves know. (CIRCULAR) Studies indicate that self-­‐knowledge is linked to epigene?c changes in the structure of DNA. (HARD SCIENCE INFORMATION – NOT RELEVANT) •  subjects have trouble switching their point of view to consider what someone else might know, mistakenly projecBng their own knowledge onto others. (TRUE EXPLANATION) Studies indicate that self-­‐knowledge is linked to epigene?c changes in the structure of DNA. (HARD SCIENCE INFORMATION – NOT RELEVANT) Hard_Science Neuroscience Social Science Judged Quality 5.5 5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.96 4.75 4.30 5.07 4.56 3.74 2.5 Circular Good Explana?on Neurojibberish effect: -­‐  does not generalize to ‘hard’ sciences ReplicaBon aaempt n =108 Colton ChrisBan Sara Hodges ReplicaBon aaempt it replicates! Hard_Science Neuroscience Social Science Judged Quality 5.5 5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 4.02 4.39 4.01 4.51 4.87 4.68 2.5 Circular Good Explana?on Fernandez-­‐Duque, D., Evans, J., ChrisBan, C., & Hodges S.D. (2015). Superfluous neuroscience informaBon makes explanaBons of psychological phenomena more appealing. Journal of Cogni:ve Neuroscience. In sum, Superfluous neuroscience info ‘explains’ psychological phenomena 1. 
2. 
3. 
4. 
Conceptual (not due to perceptual process of brain image) Specific to neuroscience (does not generalize to hard sciences) Not due to presBge (although neuro = presBge) Due to ‘brain as explanans of the mind’ (?) In sum, Superfluous neuroscience info ‘explains’ psychological phenomena 1. 
2. 
3. 
4. 
Conceptual (not due to perceptual process of brain image) Specific to neuroscience (does not generalize to hard sciences) Not due to presBge (although neuro = pres?ge) Due to ‘brain as explanans of the mind’ (?) Social ScienBst: Nicer? Neuroscience: More ScienBfic Solomon Asch, 1946 NeuroscienBst Social ScienBst social scien?sts are nice but incompetent Behavioral Neuroscience: the study of the brain and its contribuBons to thinking and behavior Cultural Psychology: the study of culture and its contribuBon to thinking and behavior TRAIT ATTRIBUTION: “For each trait, choose the pracBBoner it best describes”: Competence traits: determined, persistent, scien?fic, serious, skillful, intelligent; creaBve, imaginaBve Warmth traits: helpful, sincere,, social, tolerant, warm 1= Behavioral Neuroscien?st 6= Cultural Psychologist ScienBfic Intelligent Skillful Serious Persistent Determined Helpful Sincere Tolerant Warm Sociable social scien?sts are nice but incompetent Behavioral Neuroscience: the study of the brain and its contribuBons to thinking and behavior Cultural Psychology: the study of culture and its contribuBon to thinking and behavior ADVISING TASK: “Imagine you are a career counselor. Make recommendaBons based on their personality profiles”: social scien?sts are nice but incompetent Behavioral Neuroscience: the study of the brain and its contribuBons to thinking and behavior Cultural Psychology: the study of culture and its contribuBon to thinking and behavior ADVISING TASK: “Imagine you are a career counselor. Make recommendaBons based on their personality profiles”: John is: organized, decisive, and independent Carly is: humble, sincere, and tolerant social scien?sts are nice but incompetent Behavioral Neuroscience: the study of the brain and its contribuBons to thinking and behavior Cultural Psychology: the study of culture and its contribuBon to thinking and behavior ADVISING TASK: “Imagine you are a career counselor. Make recommendaBons based on their personality profiles”: John is: organized, decisive, and independent (>80% Beh Neuro) Carly is: humble, sincere, and tolerant
(> 80% Cult Psy) social scien?sts are nice but incompetent Behavioral Neuroscience: the study of the brain and its contribuBons to thinking and behavior Cultural Psychology: the study of culture and its contribuBon to thinking and behavior ADVISING TASK: “Imagine you are a career counselor. Make recommendaBons based on their personality profiles”: Amy is: intelligent, persistent, and skillful. Peter is: warm, relaxed and compassionate 50 Cultural Psychology 40 30 21 20 20 10 0 -­‐10 warm competent -­‐20 -­‐30 -­‐40 -­‐35 -­‐31.5 -­‐50 Behavioral Neuroscience male target female target •  Who of these two look more likeable? •  Who of these two look more a cultural psychologist? Superfluous neuroscience info ‘explains’ psychological phenomena 1. 
2. 
3. 
4. 
Conceptual (not due to perceptual process of brain image) Specific to neuroscience (does not generalize to hard sciences) Not due to presBge (although neuro = presBge) Due to ‘brain as explanans of the mind’ (?) Social Scien?st: Nicer Neuroscience: More Scien?fic Superfluous neuroscience info ‘explains’ psychological phenomena 1.  Conceptual (not due to perceptual process of brain image) 2.  Specific to neuroscience (does not generalize to hard sciences) 3.  Not due to presBge (although neuro = presBge) 4.  Due to ‘brain as explanans of the mind’ MathemaBcal descripBons various mental processes geneBcs atoms YOU various mental processes YOUR CENTRAL SELF various mental processes YOUR CENTRAL SELF “the person you truly are…so that if you lacked those aaributes you would be a different person” various mental processes YOUR CENTRAL SELF various mental processes w/ Barry Schwartz, Swarthmore College We asked 170 Americans (mturk) Central Self: “the person you truly are…so that if you lacked those aaributes you would be a different person” Peripheral Self: “things that describe you but don’t define you… so that if you didn’t have these aaributes, you would sBll be the same person”. Central vs. Peripheral Self: Which one -­‐ 
-­‐ 
-­‐ 
-­‐ 
-­‐ 
is more brain-­‐based is more informaBve of your moral character is easier for you to change through willful control will its aaributes be part of you 3 years from now contains more desirable quali?es 40 Central Self 30 20 26.3 30.5 10 18 0 -­‐10 -­‐20 -­‐30 brain-­‐based moral character change with willful control temporal stability desirability 40 Central Self 30 20 30.5 26.3 10 18 0 -­‐10 brain-­‐based moral character change with willful control temporal stability -­‐20 -­‐30 Peripheral Self desirability 40 Central Self 30 20 30.5 26.3 10 18 0 -­‐10 brain-­‐based moral character change with willful control temporal stability -­‐20 -­‐30 Peripheral Self desirability 40 Central Self 30 30.5 26.3 20 18 15.4 10 0 -­‐10 brain-­‐based moral character change with willful control temporal stability -­‐20 -­‐25.9 -­‐30 Peripheral Self desirability •  Next, parBcipants listed “10 aaributes to describe what you are like” (5 central, 5 peripheral) •  Central traits: –  kind, honest, intelligent, loving, caring, compassionate, loyal, hardworking, creaBve •  Peripheral traits: –  more variable –  Some negaBve: lazy, anxious, shy, impaBent, selfish, judgmental List of 18 traits (9 posiBve, 9 negaBve).For each trait, answer: -­‐  Centrality to Self: How central is this trait to who you are as a person? -­‐ 
-­‐ 
-­‐ 
-­‐ 
-­‐ 
(100pts scale, from ‘not at all’ to ‘who I truly am’) Brain-­‐based Desirable Stable Willful control Moral character List of 18 traits (9 posiBve, 9 negaBve).For each trait, answer: -­‐  Centrality to Self: How central is this trait to who you are as a person? -­‐ 
-­‐ 
-­‐ 
-­‐ 
-­‐ 
(100pts scale, from ‘not at all’ to ‘who I truly am’) Brain-­‐based
Desirable Stable
Willful control
Moral character
β = .10 β = .59 β = .16 p <. 001 p <. 001 p <. 001 List of 18 traits (9 posiBve, 9 negaBve).For each trait, answer: -­‐  Centrality to Self: How central is this trait to who you are as a person? -­‐ 
-­‐ 
-­‐ 
-­‐ 
-­‐ 
(100pts scale, from ‘not at all’ to ‘who I truly am’) Brain-­‐based
Desirable Stable
Willful control
Moral character
β = .10 β = .59 β = .16 β = .01 β = .03 p <. 001 p <. 001 p <. 001 ns ns In Sum, •  people think of the central self as brain-­‐based Lay Theories of Mind and Brain A neuroscience explanaBon is a good explanaBon (the allure of neuroscience) The brain contributes to who we truly are ( the self is brain-­‐made)