Seeing Differently
by MikeGeneThis study looks awfully similar to the one Michael Shermer reported on, but the location and researchers are different.
Anyway, here's the basic finding:
Viewing an opposition candidate produced signal changes in cognitive control circuitry in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and anterior cingulated cortex (ACC), as well as in emotional regions in the insula and anterior temporal poles. The ACC is important to attention control and self-monitoring, and together with the DLPFC forms a network that monitors response conflict and, when necessary, regulates emotion.
Consider the implications for those who approach the origins debate as primarily a political issue. For example, it means that when such a critic reads something by Michael Behe, his brain actually functions differently than when he is reading something by Ken Miller or Richard Dawkins (and vice versa for the political ID proponent).
Perhaps this helps explain why both sides commonly accuse each other of misrepresentation (and worse).
July 14th, 2006 at 12:00 am
Indeed, this is precisely why to be most effective peer-review is done "blind" - that way, you don't know who wrote the article/book, and can review it on its merits, rather than on your preconceived opinions of what the author's ideas and motivations might be.
That is, assuming your stuff is peer-reviewed at all ;-).
Comment by Allen_MacNeill — July 14, 2006 @ 12:00 am
July 14th, 2006 at 12:18 am
But let's say a peer reviewer has a paper and does not know who wrote it. If it mentions "intelligent design" favorably, does this trigger a change in brain activity? We don't know, now do we?
Comment by MikeGene — July 14, 2006 @ 12:18 am