ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2024
From Mary Shelley to Netflix: a Pan-European perspective on public communication of neuroscience and neurotechnology.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scientific knowledge of the human brain has captivated the public's attention and sparked their imagination for centuries. Comprehending the inner workings of the mind and the underlying molecular and physiological aspects of the central nervous system has long been the defining theme of contemporary Western scientific culture. Even as the focus has arguably shifted towards genomics in the early 21st century, the brain continues to hold the spotlight in science communication, perhaps bolstered by the hype surrounding Artificial Intelligence. Neuroscience and neurotechnology, with their connections to culture, identity, economic progress, and health, remain subjects of fascination for people of all ages who seek to understand the present and future implications of research in these fields. In this work, we explore 10 distinct ways of communication dealing with the subject of the brain, the mind, applied neurotechnology, and what makes us, and possibly other things, human. We examine European literature, material culture, and various film formats to gain insights into these captivating subjects. Instances like Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein" exemplify the historical fear of science. At the same time, TED Talks and documentaries have emerged as influential platforms for scientific communication. The intersection between art and brain imaging helps visualise abstract concepts. The gamification of thought experiments is an accessible tool for the public to understand complex cognitive phenomena. And, despite a lack of accuracy, science fiction can spark public debates on ethical issues involving the conscience of robots or the privacy of our brain data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.