Guidelines for Inclusive and Diverse Human Neuroscience Research Practices

Although neurosciences have made notable progress in theory and technology, a significant methodological issue persists with the continued reliance on homogeneous sample groups (Burns et al., 2019). This observation is neither new nor recent, as several authors have already raised concerns about the fact that behavioral scientists base their conclusions mostly on samples composed almost exclusively of people from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) societies, even though these groups are very peculiar, representing only 12% of all humans and may be considered outliers (Henrich et al., 2010). The problem is exacerbated by the frequent use of convenience samples, which tend to consist primarily of university students, resulting in a narrower demographic range that fails to represent the broader diversity within society. The inclusion of more diverse populations is crucial, notably in light of the nature versus nurture debate. It is indeed now widely accepted that both cultural and biological factors contribute to shaping human psychology and behaviors (Chiao and Ambady, 2007). However, the lack of diversity in population samples diminishes the impact of cultural (nurture) factors in the obtained results and makes it difficult to claim whether neurocognitive processes are universal or culture specific (Burns et al., 2019). Beyond cultural differences, the lack of access to diverse populations can hinder the exploration of innovative research questions in the field, which may require targeting specific populations that use, for instance, different metric systems, have unique hierarchical structures, or have experienced a unique historical event. A critical question thus remains: Why does the pursuit of greater diversity in population samples remain so limited? Part of the answer is undoubtedly tied to the unequal distribution of funding and the number of scientists in specific parts of the world who lack the resources to conduct research … Correspondence should be addressed to Emilie A. Caspar at emilie.caspar{at}ugent.be.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2024-11-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.1971-24.2024
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Cultural Differences and Values
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.57

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Guidelines for Inclusive and Diverse Human Neuroscience Research Practices

Émilie A. Caspar
4 citations
Journal of Neuroscience
Cultural Differences and Values
2.57
article

Guidelines for Inclusive and Diverse Human Neuroscience Research Practices

Émilie A. Caspar
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Although neurosciences have made notable progress in theory and technology, a significant methodological issue persists with the continued reliance on homogeneous sample groups (Burns et al., 2019). This observation is neither new nor recent, as several authors have already raised concerns about the fact that behavioral scientists base their conclusions mostly on samples composed almost exclusively of people from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) societies, even though these groups are very peculiar, representing only 12% of all humans and may be considered outliers (Henrich et al., 2010). The problem is exacerbated by the frequent use of convenience samples, which tend to consist primarily of university students, resulting in a narrower demographic range that fails to represent the broader diversity within society. The inclusion of more diverse populations is crucial, notably in light of the nature versus nurture debate. It is indeed now widely accepted that both cultural and biological factors contribute to shaping human psychology and behaviors (Chiao and Ambady, 2007). However, the lack of diversity in population samples diminishes the impact of cultural (nurture) factors in the obtained results and makes it difficult to claim whether neurocognitive processes are universal or culture specific (Burns et al., 2019). Beyond cultural differences, the lack of access to diverse populations can hinder the exploration of innovative research questions in the field, which may require targeting specific populations that use, for instance, different metric systems, have unique hierarchical structures, or have experienced a unique historical event. A critical question thus remains: Why does the pursuit of greater diversity in population samples remain so limited? Part of the answer is undoubtedly tied to the unequal distribution of funding and the number of scientists in specific parts of the world who lack the resources to conduct research … Correspondence should be addressed to Emilie A. Caspar at emilie.caspar{at}ugent.be.

Journal of NeuroscienceVol. 44(48)
Ghent University (BE)
Universiteit Gent, Bijzonder Onderzoeksfonds UGent
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Cultural Differences and Values
2.57
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.