Abstract

The use of the category of race in science (in relation to humans) remains controversial. During the last few years there has been a lively debate on this topic in the field of a relatively young neuroscience discipline called cultural neuroscience. The main focus of cultural neuroscience is on biocultural conditions of the development of different dimensions of human perceptive activity, both cognitive or emotional. These dimensions are analysed through the comparison of representatives of different social and ethnic groups. In my article, I present arguments supporting these two hypotheses: (1) the other-race effect understood as an individual, distinct effect does not exist. It is rather an exemplification of a much broader phenomenon which I call the unfamiliarity homogeneity effect. It includes not only problems with differentiation and recognition of faces of representatives of other ethnic groups, but also covers similar recognitional difficulties (e.g. recognition of members of other- social groups, other languages or even certain sounds and objects); (2) The race-based terminology and categories are used in cultural neuroscience research in a vague and inconsistent manner. Such an approach distorts the science both in empirically and conceptually significant respects. The unfamiliarity homogeneity effect is an example of such a situation: narrowing it to the other-race effect makes it difficult to analyse in a wider context crucial for its understanding.

Highlights

  • The use of the category of race in science is controversial among researchers, who are highly sensitive to any signs of ethnocentrism (Martínez Mateo et al 2012)

  • Its appropriate description should allow its better understanding; (2) The second hypothesis is that the race-based terminology and categories used in cultural neuroscience research are vague and uneven

  • The unfamiliarity homogeneity effect is an example of such a situation: narrowing it to the otherrace effect makes it difficult to analyse in a wider context, which is crucial for its correct characterisation

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The use of the category of race in science (in relation to humans) is controversial among researchers, who are highly sensitive to any signs of ethnocentrism (Martínez Mateo et al 2012). The focus of cultural neuroscience is upon the biocultural conditions of the development of different dimensions of human perceptive activity, both cognitive and emotional These dimensions are analysed through the comparison of representatives of different social and ethnic groups. Its appropriate description (as one of the similar effects resulting from unfamiliarity with the perceived object) should allow its better understanding; (2) The second hypothesis is that the race-based terminology and categories used in cultural neuroscience research are vague and uneven. Such an approach distorts the science, in empirically and conceptually significant ways. It claims that a precise conceptual analysis of the terms used in cultural neuroscience (especially such troublesome terms like “race”) is necessary in order to avoid future ambiguities and inconsistencies

Cultural neuroscience: main goals and assumptions
What is Other-race effect?
Selected hypotheses about the causes of ORE
ORE in neuroscientific research
Looking at ORE from a broader perspective
Unfamiliarity homogeneity effect: conceptual proposal and supporting data
Summary
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call