Methodological problems on the way to integrative human neuroscience

Boris Kotchoubey, Felix Tretter, Hans A. Braun, Thomas Buchheim, Andreas Draguhn, Thomas Fuchs, Felix Hasler, Heiner Hastedt, Thilo Hinterberger, Georg Northoff, Ingo Rentschler, Stephan Schleim, Stephan Sellmaier, Ludger Tebartz Van Elst, Wolfgang Tschacher

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Neuroscience is a multidisciplinary effort to understand the structures and functions of the brain and brain-mind relations. This effort results in an increasing amount of data, generated by sophisticated technologies. However, these data enhance our descriptive knowledge, rather than improve our understanding of brain functions. This is caused by methodological gaps both within and between subdisciplines constituting neuroscience, and the atomistic approach that limits the study of macro-and mesoscopic issues. Whole-brain measurement technologies do not resolve these issues, but rather aggravate them by the complexity problem. The present article is devoted to methodological and epistemic problems that obstruct the development of human neuroscience. We neither discuss ontological questions (e.g., the nature of the mind) nor review data, except when it is necessary to demonstrate a methodological issue. As regards intradisciplinary methodological problems, we concentrate on those within neurobiology (e.g., the gap between electrical and chemical approaches to neurophysiological processes) and psychology (missing theoretical concepts). As regards interdisciplinary problems, we suggest that core disciplines of neuroscience can be integrated using systemic concepts that also entail human-environment relations. We emphasize the necessity of a meta-discussion that should entail a closer cooperation with philosophy as a discipline of systematic reflection. The atomistic reduction should be complemented by the explicit consideration of the embodiedness of the brain and the embeddedness of humans. The discussion is aimed at the development of an explicit methodology of integrative human neuroscience, which will not only link different fields and levels, but also help in understanding clinical phenomena.

Original languageEnglish
JournalFrontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
Volume10
Issue numberNOV2016
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 29 2016
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Neurosciences
Brain
Technology
Neurobiology
Human Development
Psychology

Keywords

  • Brain
  • Methodology
  • Mind
  • Neuroscience
  • Psychology
  • Systems science

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sensory Systems
  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience

Cite this

Kotchoubey, B., Tretter, F., Braun, H. A., Buchheim, T., Draguhn, A., Fuchs, T., ... Tschacher, W. (2016). Methodological problems on the way to integrative human neuroscience. Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, 10(NOV2016). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnint.2016.00041

Methodological problems on the way to integrative human neuroscience. / Kotchoubey, Boris; Tretter, Felix; Braun, Hans A.; Buchheim, Thomas; Draguhn, Andreas; Fuchs, Thomas; Hasler, Felix; Hastedt, Heiner; Hinterberger, Thilo; Northoff, Georg; Rentschler, Ingo; Schleim, Stephan; Sellmaier, Stephan; Van Elst, Ludger Tebartz; Tschacher, Wolfgang.

In: Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, Vol. 10, No. NOV2016, 29.11.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kotchoubey, B, Tretter, F, Braun, HA, Buchheim, T, Draguhn, A, Fuchs, T, Hasler, F, Hastedt, H, Hinterberger, T, Northoff, G, Rentschler, I, Schleim, S, Sellmaier, S, Van Elst, LT & Tschacher, W 2016, 'Methodological problems on the way to integrative human neuroscience', Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, vol. 10, no. NOV2016. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnint.2016.00041
Kotchoubey B, Tretter F, Braun HA, Buchheim T, Draguhn A, Fuchs T et al. Methodological problems on the way to integrative human neuroscience. Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience. 2016 Nov 29;10(NOV2016). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnint.2016.00041
Kotchoubey, Boris ; Tretter, Felix ; Braun, Hans A. ; Buchheim, Thomas ; Draguhn, Andreas ; Fuchs, Thomas ; Hasler, Felix ; Hastedt, Heiner ; Hinterberger, Thilo ; Northoff, Georg ; Rentschler, Ingo ; Schleim, Stephan ; Sellmaier, Stephan ; Van Elst, Ludger Tebartz ; Tschacher, Wolfgang. / Methodological problems on the way to integrative human neuroscience. In: Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience. 2016 ; Vol. 10, No. NOV2016.
@article{b2a18c86893545e38606898715d825d3,
title = "Methodological problems on the way to integrative human neuroscience",
abstract = "Neuroscience is a multidisciplinary effort to understand the structures and functions of the brain and brain-mind relations. This effort results in an increasing amount of data, generated by sophisticated technologies. However, these data enhance our descriptive knowledge, rather than improve our understanding of brain functions. This is caused by methodological gaps both within and between subdisciplines constituting neuroscience, and the atomistic approach that limits the study of macro-and mesoscopic issues. Whole-brain measurement technologies do not resolve these issues, but rather aggravate them by the complexity problem. The present article is devoted to methodological and epistemic problems that obstruct the development of human neuroscience. We neither discuss ontological questions (e.g., the nature of the mind) nor review data, except when it is necessary to demonstrate a methodological issue. As regards intradisciplinary methodological problems, we concentrate on those within neurobiology (e.g., the gap between electrical and chemical approaches to neurophysiological processes) and psychology (missing theoretical concepts). As regards interdisciplinary problems, we suggest that core disciplines of neuroscience can be integrated using systemic concepts that also entail human-environment relations. We emphasize the necessity of a meta-discussion that should entail a closer cooperation with philosophy as a discipline of systematic reflection. The atomistic reduction should be complemented by the explicit consideration of the embodiedness of the brain and the embeddedness of humans. The discussion is aimed at the development of an explicit methodology of integrative human neuroscience, which will not only link different fields and levels, but also help in understanding clinical phenomena.",
keywords = "Brain, Methodology, Mind, Neuroscience, Psychology, Systems science",
author = "Boris Kotchoubey and Felix Tretter and Braun, {Hans A.} and Thomas Buchheim and Andreas Draguhn and Thomas Fuchs and Felix Hasler and Heiner Hastedt and Thilo Hinterberger and Georg Northoff and Ingo Rentschler and Stephan Schleim and Stephan Sellmaier and {Van Elst}, {Ludger Tebartz} and Wolfgang Tschacher",
year = "2016",
month = "11",
day = "29",
doi = "10.3389/fnint.2016.00041",
language = "English",
volume = "10",
journal = "Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience",
issn = "1662-5145",
publisher = "Frontiers Research Foundation",
number = "NOV2016",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Methodological problems on the way to integrative human neuroscience

AU - Kotchoubey, Boris

AU - Tretter, Felix

AU - Braun, Hans A.

AU - Buchheim, Thomas

AU - Draguhn, Andreas

AU - Fuchs, Thomas

AU - Hasler, Felix

AU - Hastedt, Heiner

AU - Hinterberger, Thilo

AU - Northoff, Georg

AU - Rentschler, Ingo

AU - Schleim, Stephan

AU - Sellmaier, Stephan

AU - Van Elst, Ludger Tebartz

AU - Tschacher, Wolfgang

PY - 2016/11/29

Y1 - 2016/11/29

N2 - Neuroscience is a multidisciplinary effort to understand the structures and functions of the brain and brain-mind relations. This effort results in an increasing amount of data, generated by sophisticated technologies. However, these data enhance our descriptive knowledge, rather than improve our understanding of brain functions. This is caused by methodological gaps both within and between subdisciplines constituting neuroscience, and the atomistic approach that limits the study of macro-and mesoscopic issues. Whole-brain measurement technologies do not resolve these issues, but rather aggravate them by the complexity problem. The present article is devoted to methodological and epistemic problems that obstruct the development of human neuroscience. We neither discuss ontological questions (e.g., the nature of the mind) nor review data, except when it is necessary to demonstrate a methodological issue. As regards intradisciplinary methodological problems, we concentrate on those within neurobiology (e.g., the gap between electrical and chemical approaches to neurophysiological processes) and psychology (missing theoretical concepts). As regards interdisciplinary problems, we suggest that core disciplines of neuroscience can be integrated using systemic concepts that also entail human-environment relations. We emphasize the necessity of a meta-discussion that should entail a closer cooperation with philosophy as a discipline of systematic reflection. The atomistic reduction should be complemented by the explicit consideration of the embodiedness of the brain and the embeddedness of humans. The discussion is aimed at the development of an explicit methodology of integrative human neuroscience, which will not only link different fields and levels, but also help in understanding clinical phenomena.

AB - Neuroscience is a multidisciplinary effort to understand the structures and functions of the brain and brain-mind relations. This effort results in an increasing amount of data, generated by sophisticated technologies. However, these data enhance our descriptive knowledge, rather than improve our understanding of brain functions. This is caused by methodological gaps both within and between subdisciplines constituting neuroscience, and the atomistic approach that limits the study of macro-and mesoscopic issues. Whole-brain measurement technologies do not resolve these issues, but rather aggravate them by the complexity problem. The present article is devoted to methodological and epistemic problems that obstruct the development of human neuroscience. We neither discuss ontological questions (e.g., the nature of the mind) nor review data, except when it is necessary to demonstrate a methodological issue. As regards intradisciplinary methodological problems, we concentrate on those within neurobiology (e.g., the gap between electrical and chemical approaches to neurophysiological processes) and psychology (missing theoretical concepts). As regards interdisciplinary problems, we suggest that core disciplines of neuroscience can be integrated using systemic concepts that also entail human-environment relations. We emphasize the necessity of a meta-discussion that should entail a closer cooperation with philosophy as a discipline of systematic reflection. The atomistic reduction should be complemented by the explicit consideration of the embodiedness of the brain and the embeddedness of humans. The discussion is aimed at the development of an explicit methodology of integrative human neuroscience, which will not only link different fields and levels, but also help in understanding clinical phenomena.

KW - Brain

KW - Methodology

KW - Mind

KW - Neuroscience

KW - Psychology

KW - Systems science

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85003554291&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85003554291&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3389/fnint.2016.00041

DO - 10.3389/fnint.2016.00041

M3 - Article

VL - 10

JO - Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience

JF - Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience

SN - 1662-5145

IS - NOV2016

ER -