DOCSLIB.ORG

Cultural Neuroscience Cultural Influences on Brain Function

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cultural Neuroscience Cultural Influences on Brain Function PROGRESS IN BRAIN RESEARCH VOLUME 178 CULTURAL NEUROSCIENCE: CULTURAL INFLUENCES ON BRAIN FUNCTION EDITED BY JOAN Y. CHIAO Department of Psychology, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA AMSTERDAM – BOSTON – HEIDELBERG – LONDON – NEW YORK – OXFORD PARIS – SAN DIEGO – SAN FRANCISCO – SINGAPORE – SYDNEY – TOKYO Elsevier 360 Park Avenue South, New York, NY 10010-1710 Linacre House, Jordan Hill, Oxford OX2 8DP, UK Radarweg 29, PO Box 211, 1000 AE Amsterdam, The Netherlands First edition 2009 Copyright r 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior written permission of the publisher Permissions may be sought directly from Elsevier’s Science & Technology Rights Department in Oxford, UK: phone (+44) (0) 1865 843830; fax (+44) (0) 1865 853333; email: [email protected]. Alternatively you can submit your request online by visiting the Elsevier web site at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/permissions, and selecting Obtaining permission to use Elsevier material Notice No responsibility is assumed by the publisher for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions or ideas contained in the material herein. Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, in particular, independent verification of diagnoses and drug dosages should be made British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress ISBN: 978-0-444-53361-6 (this volume) ISSN: 0079-6123 (Series) For information on all Elsevier publications visit our website at elsevierdirect.com Printed and bound in Great Britain 091011121310987654321 List of Contributors N. Ambady, Psychology Department, Tufts University, Medford, MA, USA A. Aron, Department of Psychology, State University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY, USA M.J. Boivin, International Neurologic and Psychiatric Epidemiology Program, Michigan State University, East Lansing; Neuropsychology Section, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA R.A. Brown, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA Chuansheng Chen, Department of Psychology and Social Behavior, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA Chunhui Chen, Department of Psychology and Social Behavior, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA; State Key Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China J.Y. Chiao, Department of Psychology, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA S. Choudhury, Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Berlin, Germany M. Dapretto, FPR-UCLA Center for Culture, Brain and Development; Ahmanson-Lovelace Brain Mapping Center; Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Social Behavior, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA F.B.M. de Waal, Living Links Center, Yerkes National Primate Research Center, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA S.M. Demorest, School of Music, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA J.F. Domı´nguez D., Howard Florey Institute; School of Philosophy, Anthropology and Social Inquiry, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Q. Dong, State Key Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China G.F. Egan, Howard Florey Institute; Centre for Neuroscience, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia J.B. Freeman, Psychology Department, Tufts University, Medford, MA, USA B. Giordani, Neuropsychology Section, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA J.O. Goh, Beckman Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA A.H. Gutchess, Department of Psychology, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA, USA S. Han, Department of Psychology, Peking University, Beijing, People’s Republic of China T. Hedden, McGovern Institute of Brain Research, M.I.T., Cambridge; Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Charlestown, MA, USA V. Horner, Living Links Center, Yerkes National Primate Research Center, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA M. Iacoboni, FPR-UCLA Center for Culture, Brain and Development; Ahmanson-Lovelace Brain Mapping Center; Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Social Behavior, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA A. Indeck, Department of Psychology, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA, USA S. Ketay, Department of Psychiatry, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, NY, USA H.S. Kim, Department of Psychology, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA, USA v vi L.J. Kirmayer, Division of Social & Transcultural Psychiatry, McGill University; Culture and Mental Health Research Unit, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada C.K. Frank, School of Psychology, Fielding Graduate University, Santa Barbara, CA, USA E.D. Lewis, School of Philosophy, Anthropology and Social Inquiry, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia S.-C. Li, Center for Lifespan Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany Y. Liu, Departments of Psychiatry and Neuroscience, McKnight Brain Institute, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA L. Malafouris, McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge, UK L. Mei, Department of Psychology and Social Behavior, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA; State Key Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China S.J. Morrison, School of Music, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA G. Northoff, Department of Psychiatry, Otto-von-Guericke University of Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany D.C. Park, Center for Brain Health, University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, TX, USA E.A. Reynolds Losin, Interdepartmental Neuroscience Program; FPR-UCLA Center for Culture, Brain and Development; Ahmanson-Lovelace Brain Mapping Center, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA N.O. Rule, Psychology Department, Tufts University, Medford, MA, USA M. Schaefer, Department of Neurology, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany R. Seligman, Department of Anthropology, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA D.K. Sherman, Department of Psychology, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA, USA Y.-Y. Tang, Institute of Neuroinformatics, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, China; Department of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, USA S.E. Taylor, Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA E. Temple, Department of Education Graduate Faculty in Psychological & Brain Sciences, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA R. Turner, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany G. Xue, Department of Psychology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA Preface Cultural neuroscience is a new, interdisciplinary field bridging cultural psychology, neurosciences, and neurogenetics that seeks to explain how neurobiological processes, such as genetic expression and brain function, give rise to cultural values, practices, and beliefs as well as how culture shapes neurobiological processes across macro- and micro-time scales. Although the formal study of cultural neuroscience has only recently emerged in the past decade, the question of how culture and biology mutually constitute each other has long been a source of philosophical and scientific curiosity, dating as far back as the 7th century. Nevertheless, the theoretical and empirical tools necessary to make progress in these outstanding questions has only recently become available, providing an unprecedented opportunity for scientists to make novel discoveries concerning the universality and diversity in the dynamic interplay of genes, brain, and behavior. There are several events over the past few years that have marked the arrival of cultural neuroscience as a rapidly growing field. First, notable cultural psychologists have demonstrated a growing interest in understanding how biology may give rise to cultural processes and vice versa by including the topic in the Handbook of Cultural Psychology and several symposia on cultural neuroscience at international cultural psychology meetings, such as Society for Personality and Social Psychology and American Psychological Society. A handful of smaller research workshop meetings held at Harvard University, University of Michigan, Hokkaido University, and Northwestern University between 2002 and 2009 also have played key roles in shaping the agenda for cultural neuroscience research. Cultural scientists trained in anthropology have showed similar interest by hosting a symposium on neuroanthropology at the American Anthropological Association meeting. Neuroscientists have also demonstrated increasing interest in incorporating cultural theory in the investigation of mind–brain mappings as demonstrated by strong attendance at symposia on cultural neuroscience at the international Organization of Human Brain Mapping meeting related presentations at the Cognitive Neuroscience Society meeting as well as inclusion of the topic in the Handbook of Social Neuroscience. Upcoming special issues in peer-reviewed journals such as Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience and Asian Journal
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cultural Distance, Perception of Emotional Display Rules, And
    CULTURAL DISTANCE, PERCEPTION OF EMOTIONAL DISPLAY RULES, AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON SOJOURNER ADJUSTMENT A thesis presented to the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Science Nicole L. Gullekson August 2007 2 This thesis titled CULTURAL DISTANCE, PERCEPTION OF EMOTIONAL DISPLAY RULES, AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON SOJOURNER ADJUSTMENT by NICOLE L. GULLEKSON has been approved for the Department of Psychology and the College of Arts and Sciences by ________________________________________________ Jeffrey B. Vancouver Associate Professor of Psychology ________________________________________________ Benjamin M. Ogles Dean, College of Arts and Sciences 3 Abstract GULLEKSON, NICOLE L., M.S., August 2007, Experimental Psychology CULTURAL DISTANCE, PERCEPTION OF EMOTIONAL DISPLAY RULES, AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON SOJOURNER ADJUSTMENT (109 pp.) With increased globalization, more individuals temporarily leave home to work and study in foreign countries. These sojourners are confronted with societal norms different from their home cultures. The present study investigated the extent to which international student sojourners perceive differences in emotional display norms between their home and host cultures, as well as the influence of such perception on adjustment. Although accurate perception of the host culture’s emotional display rules was not related to adjustment, a “guest” effect existed. Specifically, international student participants reported that one should
    [Show full text]
  • A Transdiagnostic Cultural Neuroscience Approach
    Journal of Experimental Psychopathology JEP Volume 4 (2013), Issue 5, 502-528 ISSN 2043-8087 / DOI:10.5127/jep.030412 Positive Emotion Regulation and Psychopathology: A Transdiagnostic Cultural Neuroscience Approach Lisa A. Hechtmana, Hannah Railab, Joan Y. Chiaoa, & June Gruberb a Northwestern University, Evanston, IL b Yale University, New Haven, CT Abstract There is burgeoning interest in the study of positive emotion regulation and psychopathology. Given the significant public health costs and the tremendous variance in national prevalence rates associated with many disorders of positive emotion, it is critical to reach an understanding of how cultural factors, along with biological factors, mutually influence positive emotion regulation. Progress in this domain has been relatively unexplored, however, underscoring the need for an integrative review and empirical roadmap for investigating the cultural neuroscientific contributions to positive emotion disturbance for both affective and clinical science domains. The present paper thus provides a multidisciplinary, cultural neuroscience approach to better understand positive emotion regulation and psychopathology. We conclude with a future roadmap for researchers aimed at harnessing positive emotion and alleviating the burden of mental illness cross-culturally. © Copyright 2013 Textrum Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Emotion Regulation; Positive Emotion; Psychopathology; Culture; Neuroscience Correspondence to: June Gruber, Department of Psychology, Yale University, P.O. Box 208205, New Haven, CT 06520. Email: [email protected] 1. Department of Psychology, Northwestern University, 2029 Sheridan Road - 102 Swift Hall, Evanston, IL 60208, USA. 2. Department of Psychology, Yale University, P.O. Box 208205, New Haven, CT 06520, USA. Received 03-Jul-2012; received in revised form 23-Sep-2012; accepted 24-Sep-2012 Journal of Experimental Psychopathology, Volume 4 (2013), Issue 5, 502-528 503 Table of Contents Introduction Positive Emotion Regulation (PER) and Psychopathology BD.
    [Show full text]
  • Buddhism and Holistic Versus Analytic Thought
    CULTURE, RELIGION AND COGNITION: BUDDHISM AND HOLISTIC VERSUS ANALYTIC THOUGHT by Alain Samson A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) 2007 University of London The London School of Economics and Political Science Institute of Social Psychology UMI Number: U615882 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U615882 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Declaration I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the MPhil/PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it). The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of the author. I warrant that this authorization does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of 2 British ity<;(.
    [Show full text]
  • Balanced Biosocial Theory for the Social Sciences
    UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations 1-1-2004 Balanced biosocial theory for the social sciences Michael A Restivo University of Nevada, Las Vegas Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/rtds Repository Citation Restivo, Michael A, "Balanced biosocial theory for the social sciences" (2004). UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations. 1635. http://dx.doi.org/10.25669/5jp5-vy39 This Thesis is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by Digital Scholarship@UNLV with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Thesis in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Thesis has been accepted for inclusion in UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Scholarship@UNLV. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BALANCED BIOSOCIAL THEORY FOR THE SOCIAL SCIENCES by Michael A. Restivo Bachelor of Arts IPIoridkijSjlarrhcIJiuAHsrsity 2001 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillm ent ofdœnxpnnnnenkfbrthe Master of Arts Degree in Sociology Departm ent of Sociology College of Liberal Arts Graduate College University of Nevada, Las Vegas M ay 2004 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: 1422154 INFORMATION TO USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Neuroscience: a Historical Introduction and Overview Nicholas O
    Unit 9 Biological Psychology, Neuropsychology and Culture Article 1 Subunit 2 Neuropsychology and Culture 8-1-2014 Cultural Neuroscience: A Historical Introduction and Overview Nicholas O. Rule University of Toronto, [email protected] Please address correspondence to: Nicholas O. Rule, Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, [email protected]; this work was supported in part by NSERC 491593. Recommended Citation Rule, N. O. (2014). Cultural Neuroscience: A Historical Introduction and Overview. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1128 This Online Readings in Psychology and Culture Article is brought to you for free and open access (provided uses are educational in nature)by IACCP and ScholarWorks@GVSU. Copyright © 2014 International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology. All Rights Reserved. ISBN 978-0-9845627-0-1 Cultural Neuroscience: A Historical Introduction and Overview Abstract The integration of cognitive neuroscience with the study of culture emerged from independent ascensions among both fields in the early 1990s. This marriage of the two previously unconnected areas of inquiry has generated a variety of empirical and theoretical works that have provided unique insights to both partners that might have otherwise gone overlooked. Here, I provide a brief historical introduction to the emergence of cultural neuroscience from its roots in cultural psychology and cognitive neuroscience to its present stature as one of the most challenging but rewarding sub-disciplines to have come from the burgeoning growth of the study of the brain and behavior. In doing so, I overview some of the more studied areas within cultural neuroscience: language, music, mathematics, visual perception, and social cognition.
    [Show full text]
  • Migration, Acculturation, and the Maintenance of Between-Group Cultural Variation’
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/234807; this version posted June 13, 2018. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY 4.0 International license. 1 Migration, acculturation, and the maintenance of 2 between-group cultural variation ∗ 3 Alex Mesoudi 4 12 June, 2018 5 Abstract 6 How do migration and acculturation (i.e. psychological or behavioral change resulting from migration) 7 affect within- and between-group cultural variation? Here I answer this question by drawing analogies 8 between genetic and cultural evolution. Population genetic models show that migration rapidly 9 breaks down between-group genetic structure. In cultural evolution, however, migrants or their 10 descendants can acculturate to local behaviors via social learning processes such as conformity, 11 potentially preventing migration from eliminating between-group cultural variation. An analysis 12 of the empirical literature on migration suggests that acculturation is common, with second and 13 subsequent migrant generations shifting, sometimes substantially, towards the cultural values of the 14 adopted society. Yet there is little understanding of the individual-level dynamics that underlie these 15 population-level shifts. To explore this formally, I present models quantifying the effect of migration 16 and acculturation on between-group cultural variation, for both neutral and costly cooperative 17 traits. In the models, between-group cultural variation, measured using F statistics, is eliminated by 18 migration and maintained by conformist acculturation. The extent of acculturation is determined 19 by the strength of conformist bias and the number of demonstrators from whom individuals learn.
    [Show full text]
  • Advancing the Study of Cultural Evolution: Academic Integration and Policy Applications Description of Conceptual Framework
    Advancing the Study of Cultural Evolution: Academic Integration and Policy Applications A workshop held at the University of Maryland College Park Campus March 19th and 20th, 2015 Organizers: Michele Gelfand and David Sloan Wilson Description of Conceptual Framework and Workshop Sessions 1 A Conceptual Framework for the Study of Cultural Evolution The study of genetic evolution has had over a century and a half to mature. The mechanisms of human cultural evolution evolved by genetic evolution and qualify as an evolutionary process in their own right. The study of cultural evolution may therefore make use of the same conceptual framework that has been developed for the study of genetic evolution. Our workshop was organized with this possibility in mind, while also leaving room for discussing the merits of other conceptual frameworks. Session 1: The proximate/ultimate distinction and Tinbergen’s four questions Evolutionary theory draws heavily on the distinction between ultimate and proximate causation (Mayr 1959), which notes that all products of evolution require two explanations: 1) Why a given trait exists, compared to many other traits that could exist (ultimate causation); and 2) How a given trait exists in a physical sense (proximate causation). Niko Tinbergen (1963) independently stressed four questions that need to be asked for all products of evolution, concerning function, phylogeny, mechanism, and development. Tinbergen’s fourfold distinction adds a temporal dimension to Mayr’s two-fold distinction, such that ultimate causation explains the nature of adaptations and the history of their evolution, while proximate causation explains the physical basis of traits and their development during the lifetime of the organism.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Introduction: the Evolution of Culture in a Microcosm
    1 Introduction: The Evolution of Culture in a Microcosm Stephen C. Levinson Evolutionary speculation constitutes a kind of metascience, which has the same intellectual fascination for some biologists that metaphysical speculation possessed for some medieval scholastics. It can be considered a relatively harmless habit, like eating peanuts, unless it assumes the form of an obsession; then it becomes a vice. —R. V. Stanier, Some aspects of the biology of cells in H. Charles and B. Knight (eds.), Organization and Control in Prokaryotic Cells As the quotation here suggests, this volume is full of the vice of speculation. Yet any student of the human condition can hardly avoid it. Somehow culture—or at least the culture-bearing ape—evolved. An evolutionary perspective on human culture, which is much less fashionable now than it was 70 or more years ago, seems inevitable, yet the social sciences actively resist it, allowing ill-informed conjectures from other sci- ences (which does little to increase the interest from the social sciences of course). In this introductory chapter, I try to do two things: The first is to deal frontally, and speculatively, with what I take to be the “big questions” about the evolution of human culture. This may serve as a partial introduction to the more detailed explo- rations in other chapters in this volume. The second is to give the reader some grist for these speculative mills. I will argue that if we look at the details of any culture, it is quite clear that we need an evolutionary perspective to understand how such fea- tures could have arisen (note that such a perspective is quite consistent with other kinds of social science explanations).
    [Show full text]
  • Culture in Social Neuroscience: a Review
    Social Neuroscience ISSN: 1747-0919 (Print) 1747-0927 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/psns20 Culture in social neuroscience: A review Nicholas O. Rule , Jonathan B. Freeman & Nalini Ambady To cite this article: Nicholas O. Rule , Jonathan B. Freeman & Nalini Ambady (2013) Culture in social neuroscience: A review, Social Neuroscience, 8:1, 3-10, DOI: 10.1080/17470919.2012.695293 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2012.695293 Published online: 06 Jun 2012. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 1223 View related articles Citing articles: 18 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=psns20 SOCIAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2013 Vol. 8, No. 1, 3–10, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2012.695293 Culture in social neuroscience: A review Nicholas O. Rule1, Jonathan B. Freeman2, and Nalini Ambady3 1Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada 2Department of Psychology, Tufts University, Boston, MA, USA 3Department of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA The aim of this review is to highlight an emerging field: the neuroscience of culture. This new field links cross– cultural psychology with cognitive neuroscience across fundamental domains of cognitive and social psychology. We present a summary of studies on emotion, perspective-taking, memory, object perception, attention, language, and the self, showing cultural differences in behavior as well as in neural activation. Although it is still nascent, the broad impact of merging the study of culture with cognitive neuroscience holds mutual distributed benefits for mul- tiple related fields.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Cultural Neuroscience Lyndac.Linandevah.Telzer
    An Introduction to Cultural Neuroscience LyndaC.LinandEvaH.Telzer This chapter’s goal is to serve as a brief introduction to the emerging feld of cultural neuroscience. It does not intend to provide an extensive review but rather a brief overview of the feld. We start by defning cultural neu- roscience and follow by providing important reasons for doing research in this feld. Next we explain some key terms and methodologies. We then highlight important studies in the feld and provide recommendations for designing a study. Finally, we make suggestions for future directions. Throughout this chapter, we choose a few specifcexamplestoillustrate ways in which cultural neuroscience researchers have utilized the concepts and tools described here. What Is Cultural Neuroscience? Cultural neuroscience is an emerging interdisciplinary feld that combines theories and methods from cultural and social psychology, anthropology, and social and cognitive neuroscience to investigate the interactions between culture, psychological processes, brain, and genes at diferent timescales (for reviews, see Chiao, Cheon, Pornpattananangkul, Mrazek, & Blizinsky, 2013; Han et al., 2013; Kim & Sasaki, 2014). Because of the broad interdisciplinary nature of the feld, describing all of the diferent ways in which cultural neuroscientists do research in this area is beyond the scope of this chapter. Here we will be focusing on the most common method, which is representations in the brain through neuroimaging techniques. Because this feld lies at the intersection of many areas of study, we begin by describing how cultural neuroscience derives from each of these The Handbook of Culture and Biology,FirstEdition.EditedbyJose´ M. Causadias, Eva H. Telzer and Nancy A.
    [Show full text]
  • CULTURAL NEUROSCIENCE: CULTURAL INFLUENCES on BRAIN FUNCTION Other Volumes in PROGRESS in BRAIN RESEARCH
    PROGRESS IN BRAIN RESEARCH VOLUME 178 CULTURAL NEUROSCIENCE: CULTURAL INFLUENCES ON BRAIN FUNCTION Other volumes in PROGRESS IN BRAIN RESEARCH Volume 143: Brain Mechanisms for the Integration of Posture and Movement, by S. Mori, D.G. Stuart and M. Wiesendanger (Eds.) – 2004, ISBN 0-444-513892. Volume 144: The Roots of Visual Awareness, by C.A. Heywood, A.D. Milner and C. Blakemore (Eds.) – 2004, ISBN 0-444-50978-X. Volume 145: Acetylcholine in the Cerebral Cortex, by L. Descarries, K. Krnjevic´ and M. Steriade (Eds.) – 2004, ISBN 0-444-51125-3. Volume 146: NGF and Related Molecules in Health and Disease, by L. Aloe and L. Calza` (Eds.) – 2004, ISBN 0-444-51472-4. Volume 147: Development, Dynamics and Pathology of Neuronal Networks: From Molecules to Functional Circuits, by J. Van Pelt, M. Kamermans, C.N. Levelt, A. Van Ooyen, G.J.A. Ramakers and P.R. Roelfsema (Eds.) – 2005, ISBN 0-444-51663-8. Volume 148: Creating Coordination in the Cerebellum, by C.I. De Zeeuw and F. Cicirata (Eds.) – 2005, ISBN 0-444-51754-5. Volume 149: Cortical Function: A View from the Thalamus, by V.A. Casagrande, R.W. Guillery and S.M. Sherman (Eds.) – 2005, ISBN 0-444-51679-4. Volume 150: The Boundaries of Consciousness: Neurobiology and Neuropathology, by Steven Laureys (Ed.) – 2005, ISBN 0-444-51851-7. Volume 151: Neuroanatomy of the Oculomotor System, by J.A. Bu¨ ttner-Ennever (Ed.) – 2006, ISBN 0-444-51696-4. Volume 152: Autonomic Dysfunction after Spinal Cord Injury, by L.C. Weaver and C. Polosa (Eds.) – 2006, ISBN 0-444-51925-4.
    [Show full text]
  • The Contribution of Cultural Neuroscience to Cultural Psychiatry Vittorio De Luca
    Editorial The contribution of cultural neuroscience to cultural psychiatry Vittorio De Luca The issue that our readers are about to read is a real source of pride for the Editorial Board, because it focuses on a fundamental topic for our discipline. Indeed, the aim of this issue is to underscore the centrality of cultural psychiatry as the branch of human science capable to create a specific synergy between neuroscience and psychiatry in order to set up a new epistemological toolbox for the study of mental health. The hybridization between neuroscience, representing the most “scientific” hard core of technological civilizations, and cultural psychiatry, promoting a more “flexible” method based on comparisons, promises to hopefully connect data from these two different sources of knowledge: on the one hand the study of biological roots of brain functioning; the study of the cultural context promoting or enhancing psychic expressions, on the other one, no matter whether these are considered normative or pathological by the cultural community, the patient’s entourage, or the psychiatric nosography currently in use. This is the reason that the last World Congress has been entitled “Cultural brain and living societies”, and also that a plenary session, a thematic symposium and a video conference were devoted to the discipline of cultural neuroscience. Today’s issue offers some interventions presented at the conference, enriched by the latest knowledge and by more systematic and analytical data and references, in order to provide readers an overall conceptual basis with state of the art of several research fields in this domain. The first contribution comes from the Italian group led by Liborio Stuppia in Chieti, and offers an essential overview of recent advance in the relationship between genetics and environment, and the devolpment of some specific aspects of human mental functioning, including intelligence.
    [Show full text]