Images are not the evidence in neuroimaging


Abstract
fMRI promises to uncover the functional structure of the brain. I argue, however, that pictures of ‘brain activity' associated with fMRI experiments are poor evidence for functional claims. These neuroimages present the results of null hypothesis significance tests performed on fMRI data. Significance tests alone cannot provide evidence about the functional structure of causally dense systems, including the brain. Instead, neuroimages should be seen as indicating regions where further data analysis is warranted. This additional analysis rarely involves simple significance testing, and so justified skepticism about neuroimages does not provide reason for skepticism about fMRI more generally
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1093/bjps/axp035
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 47,182
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Functional Analysis.Robert Cummins - 1975 - Journal of Philosophy 72 (November):741-64.
Are Neuroimages Like Photographs of the Brain?Adina L. Roskies - 2007 - Philosophy of Science 74 (5):860-872.
What Do Brain Data Really Show?Valerie Gray Hardcastle & C. Matthew Stewart - 2002 - Philosophy of Science 69 (3):572-582.

View all 12 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Philosophical Issues in Neuroimaging.Colin Klein - 2010 - Philosophy Compass 5 (2):186-198.

View all 23 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2010-05-22

Total views
152 ( #54,577 of 2,289,446 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
18 ( #45,061 of 2,289,446 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature