What happens when scientists publish papers that aren’t meant to be taken seriously? Is ironic, satirical and joke science all in good fun, or can it be dangerous?
A regular theme here at Neuroskeptic is the worrying issue of head movement during brain scans. We’ve seen that motion can alter measures of functional and structural connectivity, and that common approaches to dealing with this problem may be inadequate.
Is there a relationship between poetry and psychosis?
The idea that ‘genius’ is just one step removed from ‘madness’ is a venerable one, and psychiatrists and psychologists have spent a great (perhaps an inordinate) amount of time looking for correlations between mental illness and creativity.
In a paper just published, a group of neuroscientists report that they’ve changed their minds about how the brain processes social pain. Here’s the paper: Separate neural representations for physical pain and social rejection
An important new study could undermine the concept of ‘endophenotypes’ – and thus derail one of the most promising lines of research in neuroscience and psychiatry.
A report in the journal Archives of Sexual Behaviour describes an unusual field trip made by Canadian researcher Debra W. Soh – to a furry convention, expecting to witness some kind of sexual free-for-all (or free-fur-all).
An attempt to replicate the results of some recent neuroscience papers that claimed to find correlations between human brain structure and behavior has drawn a blank.
The words you use in your Facebook posts reveal much about your personality, according to psychologists Gregory Park and colleagues in a new study just published.