Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40360726›Full record

ArticleMolecular psychiatry2025

A history of metaphorical brain talk in psychiatry.

Kenneth S Kendler

Abstract readHistorical Article
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Overvalued Ideas: Conceptual Analysis and Literature Review.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
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.

Kenneth S KendlerVirginia Institute for Psychiatric and Behavioral Genetics, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA. Kenneth.Kendler@vcuhealth.org.ORCID 0000-0001-8689-6570

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

From the very beginnings of our field in the late 18th century, psychiatrists have engaged, often extensively, in "metaphorical brain talk" - rephrasing descriptions of mental processes in unconfirmed brain metaphors (e.g., "diseased working of the brain convolutions"). In the late 19th century, Kraepelin criticized the later developments of such approaches, termed "brain mythology" by the philosopher/psychiatrist Jaspers in 1913. In this essay, I review the history, meaning, and significance of this phenomenon and reach four conclusions. First, this trend has continued to the present day in metaphors such as the "broken brain" and the use of simplistic and empirically poorly supported explanations of psychiatric illness, such as depression being "due to an imbalance of serotonin in the brain." Second, our language stems from the tension in our profession that seeks to be a part of medicine yet declares our main focus as treatment of the mental. We feel more comfortable with the reductionist approach of brain metaphors, which, even though at times self-deceptive, reinforce our commitment to and membership in a brain-based medical specialty. Third, metaphorical brain talk can also be seen as the "promissory note" of our profession, a pledge that the day will come when we can indeed explain accurately to ourselves and to our patients the brain basis of the psychiatric disorders from which they suffer. Finally, moving away from metaphorical brain talk would reflect an increasing maturity of both the research and clinical aspects of our profession.

Indexed as

BrainMental DisordersMetaphorPsychiatryHistory, 18th CenturyHistory, 19th CenturyHistory, 20th CenturyHistory, 21st CenturyHumans

Identifiers

PMID40360726
PMCPMC12240831

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.