What is NESSHI?
NESSHI stands for “The Neuro-turn in European Social Sciences and Humanities: Impact of neuroscience on economics, marketing and philosophy”.
It is a 3-year European project involving partners from the UK, Netherlands, Germany and France, which started in June 2011. It aims at providing a better view of the transformation of disciplines from SSH (social sciences and humanities) under the influence of neuroscience. Didn’t you notice that they became more “brainy” lately? NESSHI wants to investigate how, when, why this happened, and for what consequences for our societies. Quite an ambitious program!
We choose to include a strong sociological, empirical dimension: with field work, lots of interviews and also with a bit of scientometrics, we hope to get as close as possible to the daily practices of researchers. The hope is to better understand why, from their point of view, neuro-SSH have been deemed interesting, irrelevant, hype, or revolutionary, and what difference did it make in their research routines. The utlimate end is to understand how these changes have already had an impact down the road on our societies: has marketing changed? (oh yes!), have economic policies changed? (soon, we’re told!), and what about the very notion of an individual’s autonomy?
The NESSHI team had its first workshop in Leiden on June 9, with each partner laying out their work plans for the next three years. Check the website of the project and participate in the associated forum (can be accessed from the website) to get news and add your voice to the conversation: Did you experience the neuro-turn in your discipline?
– Website of NESSHI: www.nesshi.eu
– Press release by Erasmus University Rotterdam (a participant to the project): http://www.rsm.nl/home/faculty/Research%20News?p_item_id=6635945
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged Europe, European project, nesshi, neuro-turn, ORA | Leave a Comment »
Video and slides of my presentation at the “Imaging the Mind” Conference:
(does not properly display on Google Chrome 11 beta, looks fine on Internet Explorer 9 and Firefox 3.6)
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »
Stephan Schleim from the University of Groningen in cooperation with Machiel Keestra, from the University of Amsterdam, have organized a very interesting conference in Amsterdam aimed at making philosophers, psychologists and neuroscientists dialogue about neuroimaging.
To me, the most interesting contribution on Saturday was by Michael Anderson (a cognitive scientist and philosopher by training, from University of Lancaster, PA), who reported on his study of neuroimaging data: to counter the criticisms about reverse inference, and over-simplicity of localizationism, he presented a “simple” idea – that network analysis could shed light on the agency of cognitive functions. Those would not be over specialized and called sequentially, but simultaneously recruited at the image of a cluster of computers. Your reaction might be “nothing new, how is that different from systems cognitive neuroscience?” Well, the metaphor of networks allows for new insights, since network analysis comes with an analytical framework to interpret the structure of the network (its density, clusterisation, diameter, etc.) where to my knowledge systems analysis remains quite silent. Also, network analysis translates in intuitive visualizations which help generate new hypotheses, and stimulate thinking generally (at least so I found, when using network analyses in other contexts). The paper which describes this “network in the brain” approach is here.
The sessions have been filmed, so Michael Anderson’s performance should be online soon! Meanwhile, here are the slides of my own presentation – that won’t provide you with a detailed argument, but give you an idea of the topics I evoked.
Posted in cognitive neuroscience | Tagged cognitive neuroscience, Lancaster, Michael Anderson, network analysis, neuroimaging | Leave a Comment »
Paul Glimcher co-created the field of neuroeconomics a decade ago. After a first book in 2003 which imagined a research program for neuroeconomics, his just published second book delivers the first results. Is neuroeconomics now a reality? What questions does it raise? I review the book here: http://seinecle.110mb.com/html/neuroeconomics.php (first item of the list).
PS: In the review, I did not comment on the book’s dust jacket. As can be seen above, it conveys a very gloomy impression of the topic of neuroeconomics – for a book which actually promotes it! I would be curious to know how this very wrong choice of an illustration came to be made.
Posted in neuroeconomics | Tagged book review, Glimcher, neuroeconomics, OUP | Leave a Comment »
Here is a first movie I made on neuromarketing.
To explain a bit: this is realized with Gephi, a software for the visualization of networks evolving through time.
What is the data represented? This is a co-occurrence network, obtained through the AlchemyAPI plugin for Gephi. I know, this sounds cryptic! Basically, the idea is that words represented in the network are the most frequent ones used in webpages discussing neuromarketing. A link between any two nodes means that those two words frequently co-occur (ie, they are used in same documents, as opposed to being frequently used but never appearing simultaneously in the same text).
This is just a proof of concept – the movie is hard to read and needs much refinement. I presented today at the Sunbelt conference a refined version, with accompanying slides (do click on the slides, not on the timeline below them).
Posted in movies, neuromarketing | Tagged AlchemyAPI, gephi, movies, semantic networks, semantics, SUNBELT | 4 Comments »
“Economics Job Market Rumor” is a website which functions like a blog. You write a blogpost which consists most often of a single line, and which is the statement of a rumor you’ve heard. People can react to that by writing a comment, confirming or disconfirming the rumor. The possibility to remain anonymous acts as an incentive to voice honest opinions, I suppose.
A friend of mine had posted a simple question related to “history of economic thought”, and got fairly sympathetic responses to this field. The average, job-seeking economist is not completely averse to history of economic thought, would it seem (good for me!)
What about neuroeconomics? I let you see the comments posted to a post consisting of the single word, “Neuroeconomics”. Very harsh!
Interestingly, it has been posted in the category “micro job rumors”, micro standing for “microeconomics” of course. Would the responses have been different in the smaller, but more oecumenic category “The Economics Discipline” instead? I just started a thread, let’s wait for the reactions!
Posted in neuroeconomics | Tagged economics job market, rumor | Leave a Comment »
How best counter a nefarious reputation, and a climate of vague but persistant bad attitudes towards neuromarketing? Well, let’s laugh about it, and relax when discussing it.
This is exactly the strategic move attempted by Neurofocus (did they find it in their EEG readings, or were they advised by old-fashioned marketers?). I let you judge whether they succeed:
By the way, there is a real market developing for nerds rapping on uncool topics. Take your pick:
On Hayek and Keynes and business cycles
On natural selection, Darwinism and creationism (the performer is actually talented here!)
Posted in neuromarketing | Tagged rap, video | Leave a Comment »