ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2026
Divergent philosophical commitments in neuroscience: Evidence from a global survey.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The mind-brain relationship is a foundational yet underexplored dimension of contemporary neuroscience, shaping research framing, data interpretation, and public communication. We conducted a large-scale international survey of 2,657 neuroscientists to assess their views on the mind-brain problem, free will, and the future of the discipline. Our results reveal a complex and sometimes paradoxical worldview. While 64% of participants endorse reductive physicalism-the view that mental activity is fully reducible to brain function-only 17.5% reject free will. Despite estimating that current knowledge covers only a limited portion of brain structure and function (30%), respondents express marked optimism about the future of neuroscience, including the prospect of fully understanding the human being and mental disorders through neuroscience, and even achieving mind reading and mental uploading. A principal component analysis identified five latent dimensions, some of which vary systematically across sociodemographic and disciplinary factors. These findings indicate that neuroscientists hold diverse philosophical commitments that diverge from common narratives of hard determinism. The prevalence of neuroessentialist views further highlights the need for sustained interdisciplinary dialogue to address the conceptual, ethical, and societal implications of neuroscientific progress.
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.