Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40326157›Full record

ReviewWiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science

Theory Change in Cognitive Neurobiology: The Case of the Orbitofrontal Cortex.

David L Barack

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

David L BarackDepartment of Philosophy, Lingnan University, Hong Kong, Hong Kong.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7131-4638

Funding

Philosophy of Contemporary and Future Science SRFS2122-3H01Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong SAR, ChinaSenior Research Fellowship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

How do theories of the functions of parts of the brain change? I argue that computational hypotheses help explain the nature of theorizing in cognitive neurobiology. I will focus on the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), a frontal region of the brain implicated in an array of cognitive functions. Different theories of OFC state different principles of OFC function and use different concepts to construct those principles. There are also differences in the patterns of use of evidence across different theories. I briefly survey several extant proposals for understanding theory change in science generally and cognitive neuroscience specifically, including paradigm shifts, tool innovation, mechanism discovery, conceptual innovation, exploratory experimentation, and changes in measurement techniques. While these extant approaches fall short at describing the nature of theory change illustrated by the case of OFC, they are compatible with my proposal that these theoretical changes and differences in the use of evidence result from different computational hypotheses about the region.

Indexed as

CognitionCognitive NeuroscienceNeurobiologyPrefrontal CortexHumanscognitive neuroscienceexplanationorbitofrontal cortextheory

Identifiers

PMID40326157
PMCPMC12053038

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.