In science it often happens that scientists say.You know that's a really good argument:my position is mistaken.and then they actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again.They really do it It doesn't happen as often as it should,because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful.But it happens every day cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion -Carl Sagan,1987
In science it often happens that scientists say, “You know that’s a really good argument; my position is mistaken,” and then they actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn’t happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion. ~Carl Sagan, 1987 002_021_CogNeu_4e_Ch01.indd 2 7/17/13 9:27 AM
A Brief History chapter of Cognitive 1 Neuroscience AS ANNE GREEN WALKED to the gallows in the castle yard of Oxford,England. in 1650,she must have been feeling scared,angry,and frustrated.She was about to be executed for a crime she had not committed:murdering her stillborn child. Many thoughts raced through her head,but"I am about to play a role in OUTLINE A Historical Perspective The Brain Story s and Green' The Psychological Story The Instruments of Neuroscience killed within 21 milcs ried to their office The Book in Your Hands The docto her mouh and rubbed a feather on her neck tomakehe ugh.They rubbed her hands and feet for sev ral minutes.bled five es of her blood swabbed her neck wounds with tur ntine,and cared for her through the night.The next r,Anne asked for a beer.Five days After her ordeal.the authorities wanted to hang anne again.But willis and petty fought in her defense,arguing that her baby had been stillborn and its death was not her fault.They declared that divine providence had stepped in and provided her miraculous escape from death,thus proving her innocence.Their arguments prevailed.Anne was set free and went on to marry and have three more children This miraculousexperience was wellpublicized in England (Figure 1.1).Thomas Willis (Figure 1.2)owed much to Anne Green and the fame brought to him by the events of r resurrection.With it came money he desperately needed and the prestige to publish and disscminate his ideas,and he nadese nro st-Known h ne term neurology and
3 1 chapter A S A N N E G R E E N WA L K E D to the gallows in the castle yard of Oxford, England, in 1650, she must have bee n fee ling scared, angry, and fr ustrated. She was about to be executed for a crime she had not committ ed: murdering her stillborn child. Many thoughts raced through her head, but “I am about to play a role in the founding of clinical neurology and neuroanatomy” although accurate, certainly was not one of them. She proclaimed her innocence to the crowd, a psalm was read, and she was hanged. She hung there for a full half hour before she was taken down, pronounced dead, and placed in a coffi n provided by Drs. Th omas Willis and William Petty . Th is was when Anne Gree n’s luck began to improve. Willis and Petty were physicians and had permission fr om King Charles I to dissect, for medical research, the bodies of any criminals killed within 21 miles of Oxford. So, instead of being buried, Anne’s body was carried to their offi ce. An autopsy, however, was not what took place. As if in a scene fr om Edgar Allan Poe, the coffi n began to emit a grumbling sound. Anne was alive! Th e doctors poured spirits in her mouth and rubbed a feather on her neck to make her cough. Th ey rubbed her hands and fee t for several minutes, bled fi ve ounces of her blood, swabbed her neck wounds with turpentine, and cared for her through the night. Th e next morning, able to drink fl uids and fee ling more chipper, Anne asked for a bee r. Five days later, she was out of bed and eating normally (Molnar, 2004; Zimmer, 2004). Aft er her ordeal, the authorities wanted to hang Anne again. But Willis and Petty fought in her defense, arguing that her baby had bee n stillborn and its death was not her fault. Th ey declared that divine providence had stepped in and provided her miraculous escape fr om death, thus proving her innocence. Th eir arguments prevailed. Anne was set fr ee and went on to marry and have three more children. Th is miraculous experience was well publicized in England (Figure 1.1). Th omas Willis (Figure 1.2) owed much to Anne Gree n and the fame brought to him by the events of her resurrection. With it came money he desperately nee ded and the prestige to publish his work and disseminate his ideas, and he had some good ones. An inquisitive neurologist, he actually coined the term neurology and became one of the best-known doctors of his time. He was the fi rst anatomist to link abnormal human behaviors to changes in brain structure. He drew these conclusions aft er treating patients throughout their A Brief History of Cognitive Neuroscience OUTLINE A Historical Perspective The Brain Story The Psychological Story The Instruments of Neuroscience The Book in Your Hands 002_021_CogNeu_4e_Ch01.indd 3 8/2/13 9:12 AM
4|CHAPTER 1 A Brief History of Cognitive Neuroscience arises from awareness,per eption, and reasoning) (the stud sys and ideas of an mind.And so the erm took hold in the scien- AGURE 1.1 An artistic rendition of the mira tific community. Anne Green in 1650. When considering the cinical neuroscience. ue Mler Narea our brains through the process of evolution;they were not to link specific brain da designed by a team of rational engineers.While life first appeared on our 4.5-billion-year-old Earth approximately fers information in what would later be called neuronal 3.8 billion years ago,human brains,in their present form,have been around for only about 100,000 years conduction With his colleague and friend Christopher Wren(the a mere drop in the bucket.The primate brain appeared architect who designed St.Paul's Cathedral in London), etween 34 million and 23 million years ago,during the Willis created drawings of the human brain that re- Dligocene epoch.It evolved into the progressively larger mained the most accurate representations for 200 years (Figure 1.3).He also coined names for a myriad of brain regions (Table 1.1;Molnar,2004;Zimmer,2004).In short,Willis set in motion the ideas and knowledge base that took er.we some o and mad ions to r the e and h red tov ard und A Historical Perspective City taxi.One of us(M.S.G.)was riding with the g 23 cognitive psychologist George A.Miller on the way to a dinner meeting at the Algonquin Hotel.The dinner was being held for scientists from Rockefeller and Cornell universities,who were joining forces to study how the brain enables the mind-a subject in need of a name.Out of that taxi ride came the term cognitive neuroscience- from cognition,or the process of knowing (i.e.,what Brain and Nerves
4 | CHAPTER 1 A Brief History of Cognitive Neuroscience arises fr om awareness, perception, and reasoning), and neuroscience (the study of how the nervous system is organized and functions). Th is see med the perfect term to describe the question of understanding how the functions of the physical brain can yield the thoughts and ideas of an intangible mind. And so the term took hold in the scientifi c community . When considering the miraculous properties of brain function, bear in mind that Mother Nature built our brains through the process of evolution; they were not designed by a team of rational enginee rs. While life fi rst appeared on our 4.5-billion-year-old Earth approximately 3.8 billion years ago, human brains, in their present form, have bee n around for only about 100,000 years, a mere drop in the bucket. Th e primate brain appeared betw ee n 34 million and 23 million years ago, during the Oligocene epoch. It evolved into the progressively larger brains of the great apes in the Miocene epoch betw ee n roughly 23 million and 7 million years ago. Th e human lives and autopsying them aft er their deaths. Willis was among the fi rst to link specifi c brain damage to specifi c behavioral defi cits, and to theorize how the brain transfers information in what would later be called neuronal conduction . With his colleague and fr iend Christopher Wren (the architect who designed St. Paul’s Cathedral in London), Willis created drawings of the human brain that remained the most accurate representations for 200 years (Figure 1.3). He also coined names for a myriad of brain regions (Table 1.1; Molnar, 2004; Zimmer, 2004). In short, Willis set in motion the ideas and knowledge base that took hundreds of years to develop into what we know today as the fi eld of cognitive neuroscience . In this chapter, we discuss some of the scientists and physicians who have made important contributions to this fi eld. You will discover the origins of cognitive neuroscience and how it has developed into what it is today: a discipline geared toward understanding how the brain works, how brain structure and function aff ect behavior, and ultimately how the brain enables the mind. A Historical Perspective Th e scientifi c fi eld of cognitive neuroscience received its name in the late 1970s in the back seat of a New York City taxi. One of us (M.S.G.) was riding with the great cognitive psychologist George A. Miller on the way to a dinner mee ting at the Algonquin Hotel. Th e dinner was being held for scientists fr om Rockefeller and Cornell universities, who were joining forces to study how the brain enables the mind—a subject in nee d of a name. Out of that taxi ride came the term cognitive neuroscience — fr om cognition , or the process of knowing (i.e., what FIGURE 1.1 An artistic rendition of the miraculous resurrection of Anne Green in 1650. FIGURE 1.3 The human brain (ventral view) drawn by Christopher Wren for Thomas Willis, published in Willis’s The Anatomy of the Brain and Nerves. FIGURE 1.2 Thomas Willis (1621–1675), a founder of clinical neuroscience. 002_021_CogNeu_4e_Ch01.indd 4 7/17/13 9:27 AM
The Brain Story5 TABLE 1.1 A Selection of Terms Coined by Thomas Willis Term tics of hu ed inside the hed n develo ed to the nt where da aldid not and right hemispheres of every Axonal fibers connecting the constructing complex theories about the motives of fellow cerebellum and brainstem. humans.Examples of attempts to understand the world Claustrum and our place in it inchde oedinus rex (the ancient greek sueand the putamen. play that deals with the nature of the child-parent conflict) and Mesopotamian and Egyptian theories on the nature of Corpus striatum religion and the universe.Although the pre-Socratic Greek philosopher,Thales,rejected supematural explanations of The phenomena and proclaimed that every event had a natu- Internal capsule White matter pathways conveying information from the thalamus to the methodology to explore the mind systematically through Medullary pyramids t consists o It wasn'tuntil the 19thcentury that the moder tradi of observing,manipulating,and Neurology The study of the nervous system and starte th its disorders L:I Optic thalamus The portion of the thalamus relating to ngets its job P isual processing Spinal accessory ulders the hyp as the scien Stria terminalis thata basal forebrain alon sure foot ting.And in of c Striatum Gray matter structure of the basal end to the rich phe na to study. ganglia Vagus nerve ranial rve.which. The Brain Story roblem to solve.A hun cls e in the ed to c y,and do th .Yo 5-7 million ago.Since that an, start by looking at the and askin have evolved into the nt hutr able of all ple of questions.“Hn g p s the blob g yourk as orts ofwondrous feats Thro ahout this hook we will be ch part contributing to a whole?Or,is the reminding you to take the evolutionary perspective:Why blob full of individual processing parts,each carrying out might this behavior have evolved?How could it promote specific functions,so the result is something that looks survival and reproduction?wWHGD?(What would a like it is acting as a whole unit?"from a distance the citv hunter-gather do?)The evolutionary perspective often of New York(another type of blob)appears as an inte- helps us to ask more informed questions and provides grated whole,but it is actually composed of millions of insight into how and why the brain functions as it does. individual processors- that is,people.Perhaps people,in During most of our history,humans were too busy to turn,are made of smaller,more specialized units think about thought.Although there can be little doubt that This central issue- -whether the mind is enabled by the the brains of our long-ago ancestors could engage in such whole brain working in concert or by specialized parts of activities,life was given over to more practical matters, such as surviving in tough environments,developing ways
The Brain Story | 5 to live bett er by inventing agriculture or domesticating animals, and so forth. Nonetheless, the brain mechanisms that enable us to generate theories about the characteristics of human nature thrived inside the heads of ancient humans. As civilization developed to the point where dayto-day survival did not occupy every hour of every day, our ancestors began to spend time looking for causation and constructing complex theories about the motives of fellow humans. Examples of att empts to understand the world and our place in it include Oedipus Rex (the ancient Gree k play that deals with the nature of the child–parent confl ict) and Mesopotamian and Egyptian theories on the nature of religion and the universe. Although the pre-Socratic Gree k philosopher, Th ales, rejected supernatural explanations of phenomena and proclaimed that every event had a natural cause (presaging modern cognitive neuroscience), the early Gree ks had one big limitation: Th ey did not have the methodology to explore the mind systematically through experimentation. It wasn’t until the 19th century that the modern tradition of observing, manipulating, and measuring became the norm, and scientists started to determine how the brain gets its jobs done. To understand how biological systems work, a laboratory is nee ded and experiments have to be performed to answer the questions under study and to support or refute the hypotheses and conclusions that have bee n made. Th is approach is known as the scientifi c method, and it is the only way that a topic can move along on sure footing. And in the case of cognitive neuroscience, there is no end to the rich phenomena to study. The Brain Story Imagine that you are given a problem to solve. A hunk of biological tissue is known to think, remember, att end, solve problems, tell jokes, want sex, join clubs, write novels, exhibit bias, fee l guilty , and do a zillion other things. You are supposed to fi gure out how it works. You might start by looking at the big picture and asking yourself a couple of questions. “Hmmm, does the blob work as a unit with each part contributing to a whole? Or, is the blob full of individual processing parts, each carrying out specifi c functions, so the result is something that looks like it is acting as a whole unit?” From a distance the city of New York (another ty pe of blob) appears as an integrated whole, but it is actually composed of millions of individual processors—that is, people. Perhaps people, in turn, are made of smaller, more specialized units. Th is central issue—whether the mind is enabled by the whole brain working in concert or by specialized parts of the brain working at least partly independently— is what fuels much of modern research in cognitive neuroscience. lineage diverged fr om the last common ancestor that we shared with the chimpanzee somewhere in the range of 5–7 million years ago. Since that divergence, our brains have evolved into the present human brain, capable of all sorts of wondrous feats. Th roughout this book, we will be reminding you to take the evolutionary perspective: Why might this behavior have evolved? How could it promote survival and reproduction? WWHGD? (What would a hunter-gather do?) Th e evolutionary perspective oft en helps us to ask more informed questions and provides insight into how and why the brain functions as it does. During most of our history, humans were too busy to think about thought. Although there can be litt le doubt that the brains of our long-ago ancestors could engage in such activities, life was given over to more practical matt ers, such as surviving in tough environments, developing ways TABLE 1.1 A Selection of Terms Coined by Thomas Willis Term Definition Anterior Axonal fibers connecting the middle commissure and inferior temporal gyri of the left and right hemispheres. Cerebellar Axonal fibers connecting the peduncles cerebellum and brainstem. Claustrum A thin sheath of gray matter located between two brain areas: the external capsule and the putamen. Corpus striatum A part of the basal ganglia consisting of the caudate nucleus and the lenticular nucleus. Inferior olives The part of the brainstem that modulates cerebellar processing. Internal capsule White matter pathways conveying information from the thalamus to the cortex. Medullary pyramids A part of the medulla that consists of corticospinal fibers. Neurology The study of the nervous system and its disorders. Optic thalamus The portion of the thalamus relating to visual processing. Spinal accessory The 11th cranial nerve, which nerve innervates the head and shoulders. Stria terminalis The white matter pathway that sends information from the amygdala to the basal forebrain. Striatum Gray matter structure of the basal ganglia. Vagus nerve The 10th cranial nerve, which, among other functions, has visceral motor control of the heart. 002_021_CogNeu_4e_Ch01.indd 5 7/17/13 9:27 AM
6|CHAPTER1 ABrief History of Cognitive Neuroscience As we will see,the dominant size would cause a bump in the overlying skull.Logical years,and i ng t ality of the pe son ins the h ng th th the kull of cha job ints to olitically for Willis's ideas sked to te.Gal 月GURE1.4 Franz Joseph anded u n b a vo rian ph that the future emperor was quite sure he poss hen gall later Paris Napoleon d dthat phrenoloy needed closer scrutiny and ordered the academy to obtain some sci- mind and that innate faculties were localized in specifi entific evidence of its validity.Although Gall was a regions of the cerebral cortex.He thought that the brain physician and neuroanatomist,he was not a scientist. was organized around some 35 or more specibc functions He observed correlations and sought only to confirm, ranging from cognitive basics such as language and colo perception to more ephemeral capacities such as affection cRo空 and a moral sense,and each was supported by specific brair come up with any concrete findings that could back up regions.These ideas were well received,and Gall took his this theory. zhei ing on ciple Joh happ H with ypo it a pers of th n the the b ). he P n he rer ved rebra anim o longer had percep lity,and GURE15(a) ley by Jessie A (h)The ticson the skull,from the ican Phre March1848.(c)Fowler&Wells Co.publica
6 | CHAPTER 1 A Brief History of Cognitive Neuroscience size would cause a bump in the overlying skull. Logically, then, Gall and his colleagues believed that a careful analysis of the skull could go a long way in describing the personality of the person inside the skull. Gall called this technique anatomical personology (Figure 1.5). Th e idea that character could be divined through palpating the skull was dubbed phrenology by Spurzheim and, as you may well imagine, soon fell into the hands of charlatans. Some employers even required job applicants to have their skulls “read” before they were hired. Gall, apparently, was not politically astute. When asked to read the skull of Napoleon Bonaparte, Gall did not ascribe to his skull the noble characteristics that the future emperor was quite sure he possessed. When Gall later applied to the Academy of Science of Paris, Napoleon decided that phrenology nee ded closer scrutiny and ordered the Academy to obtain some scientifi c evidence of its validity . Although Gall was a physician and neuroanatomist, he was not a scientist. He observed correlations and sought only to confi rm, not disprove, them. Th e Academy asked physiologist Marie-Jean-Pierre Flourens (Figure 1.6) to see if he could come up with any concrete fi ndings that could back up this theory. Flourens set to work. He destroyed parts of the brains of pigeons and rabbits and observed what happened. He was the fi rst to show that indee d certain parts of the brain were responsible for certain functions. For instance, when he removed the cerebral hemispheres, the animal no longer had perception, motor ability , and judgment. As we will see , the dominant view has changed back and forth over the years, and it continues to change today. Th omas Willis foreshadowed cognitive neuroscience with the notion that isolated brain damage ( biology) could aff ect behavior (psychology), but his insights slipped fr om view. It took another century for Willis’s ideas to resurface. Th ey were expanded upon by a young Austrian physician and neuroanatomist, Franz Joseph Gall ( Figure 1.4). Aft er studying numerous patients, Gall became convinced that the brain was the organ of the mind and that innate faculties were localized in specifi c regions of the cerebral cortex. He thought that the brain was organized around some 35 or more specifi c functions, ranging fr om cognitive basics such as language and color perception to more ephemeral capacities such as aff ection and a moral sense, and each was supported by specifi c brain regions. Th ese ideas were well received, and Gall took his theory on the road, lecturing throughout Europe. Building on his theories, Gall and his disciple Johann Spurzheim hypothesized that if a person used one of the faculties with greater fr equency than the others, the part of the brain representing that function would grow (Gall & Spurzheim, 1810–1819). Th is increase in local brain FIGURE 1.4 Franz Joseph Gall (1758–1828), one of the founders of phrenology. FIGURE 1.5 (a) An analysis of Presidents Washington, Jackson, Taylor, and McKinley by Jessie A. Fowler, from the Phrenological Journal, June 1898. (b) The phrenological map of personal characteristics on the skull, from the American Phrenological Journal, March 1848. (c) Fowler & Wells Co. publication on marriage compatibility in connection with phrenology, 1888. a b c 002_021_CogNeu_4e_Ch01.indd 6 7/17/13 9:27 AM