Advertisement

Synthese

, 167:511 | Cite as

The multiplicity of experimental protocols: a challenge to reductionist and non-reductionist models of the unity of neuroscience

  • Jacqueline A. SullivanEmail author
Article

Abstract

Descriptive accounts of the nature of explanation in neuroscience and the global goals of such explanation have recently proliferated in the philosophy of neuroscience (e.g., Bechtel, Mental mechanisms: Philosophical perspectives on cognitive neuroscience. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2007; Bickle, Philosophy and neuroscience: A ruthlessly reductive account. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishing, 2003; Bickle, Synthese, 151, 411–434, 2006; Craver, Explaining the brain: Mechanisms and the mosaic unity of neuroscience. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007) and with them new understandings of the experimental practices of neuroscientists have emerged. In this paper, I consider two models of such practices; one that takes them to be reductive; another that takes them to be integrative. I investigate those areas of the neuroscience of learning and memory from which the examples used to substantiate these models are culled, and argue that the multiplicity of experimental protocols used in these research areas presents specific challenges for both models. In my view, these challenges have been overlooked largely because philosophers have hitherto failed to pay sufficient attention to fundamental features of experimental practice. I demonstrate that when we do pay attention to such features, evidence for reduction and integrative unity in neuroscience is simply not borne out. I end by suggesting some new directions for the philosophy of neuroscience that pertain to taking a closer look at the nature of neuroscientific experiments.

Keywords

Experiment Experimentation Explanation Learning Long-term potentiation (LTP) Mechanism Protocol Reduction Reliability Unity Validity 

References

  1. Aizawa K. (2007) The biochemistry of memory consolidation: A model system for the philosophy of mind. Synthese 155: 65–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bechtel W. (2007) Mental mechanisms: Philosophical perspectives on cognitive neuroscience. Lawrence Erlbaum, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Bechtel W., Stufflebeam R.S. (2001). Epistemic issues in procuring evidence about the brain: The importance of research instruments and techniques. In: Bechtel W., Mandik P., Mundale J., Stufflebeam R.S. (Eds). Philosophy and the neurosciences: A reader. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 55–81Google Scholar
  4. Bickle J. (1998) Psychoneural reduction: The new wave. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. Bickle J. (2003) Philosophy and neuroscience: A ruthlessly reductive account. Kluwer Academic Publishing, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  6. Bickle J. (2006) Reducing mind to molecular pathways: Explicating the reductionism implicit in current cellular and molecular neuroscience. Synthese 151: 411–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bickle J. (2007) Ruthless reductionism and social cognition. Journal of Physiology-Paris 101: 230–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bielsky I., Hu S., Ren X., Terwilliger E., Young L. (2005) The V1a vasopressin receptor is necessary and sufficient for normal social recognition: A gene replacement study. Neuron 47: 503–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bliss T., Lømo T. (1973) Long-lasting potentiation of synaptic transmission in the dentate area of the anaesthetized rabbit following stimulation of the perforant path. Journal of Physiology 232(2): 331–356Google Scholar
  10. Bogen J. (2002) Epistemological custard pies from functional brain imaging. Philosophy of Science 69: S59–S71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bogen J., Woodward J. (1988) Saving the phenomena. The Philosophical Review 97: 303–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bronfenbrenner U. (1979) The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  13. Brunswick E. (1943) Organismic achievement and environmental probability. The Psychological Review 50: 255–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Campbell D.D., Stanley J. (1963) Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Rand-McNally, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  15. Cartwright N. (1991) Replicability, reproducibility and robustness: Comments on collins. History of Political Economy 23(1): 143–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cartwright N. (1999) The dappled world: A study of the boundaries of science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  17. Churchland P.S. (1982) Mind brain reduction—new light from the philosophy of science. Neuroscience 7(5): 1041–1047CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cook T.D., Campbell D.D. (1979) Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Rand-McNally, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  19. Craver C. (2001) Role functions, mechanisms and hierarchy. Philosophy of Science 68: 31–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Craver C. (2002) Interlevel experiments and multilevel mechanisms in the neuroscience of memory. Philosophy of Science Supplement 69: S83–S97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Craver C. (2003) The making of a memory mechanism. Journal of the History of Biology 36: 153–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Craver C. (2007) Explaining the brain: Mechanisms and the mosaic unity of neuroscience. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  23. Craver C., Darden L. (2001) Discovering mechanisms in neurobiology: The case of spatial memory. In: Machamer P.K., Grush R., McLaughlin P.(eds) Theory and method in the neurosciences. University of Pittsburgh Press, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  24. Cronbach L., Meehl P. (1955) Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin 52: 281–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dudek, S., & Fields, R. D. (2001). Mitogen-activated protein kinase/Extracellular signal-regulated kinase activation in somatodendritic compartments: Roles of action potentials, frequency, and mode of calcium entry. The Journal of Neuroscience, 21, RC122.Google Scholar
  26. English J.D., Sweatt J.D. (1996) Activation of p42 mitogen-activated protein kinase in hippocampal long-term potentiation. Journal of Biological Chemistry 271(40): 24329–24332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. English J.D., Sweatt J.D. (1997) A requirement for the mitogen-activated protein kinase cascade in hippocampal long term potentiation. Journal of Biological Chemistry 272(31): 19103–19106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Feest, U. (2003). Operationism, experimentation, and concept formation. Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
  29. Ferguson J., Aldag M., Insel T., Young L. (2001) Oxytocin in the medial amygdala is essential for social recognition in the mouse. Journal of Neuroscience 21(20): 8278–8285Google Scholar
  30. Ferguson J.N., Young L.J., Insel T.R. (2002) The neuroendocrine basis of social recognition. Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology 23: 200–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Franklin A. (1986) The neglect of experiment. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Franklin A. (1999) Can that be right?: Essays on experiment, evidence, and science. Kluwer, BostonGoogle Scholar
  33. Giovannini M., Blitzer R., Wong T., Asoma K., Tsokas P., Morrison J., Iyengar R., Landau E. (2001) Mitogen-activated protein kinase regulates early phosphorylation and delayed expression of Ca2+ Calmodulin-dependent protein kinase II in long-term potentiation. Journal of Neuroscience 21(18): 7053–7062Google Scholar
  34. Goldman A. (1988) Epistemology and cognition. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  35. Guala F. (2003) Experimental localism and external validity. Philosophy of Science Supplement 70: 1195–1205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Guala F. (2005) The methodology of experimental economics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  37. Hacking I. (1983) Representing and intervening. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  38. Hacking I. (1992) The self-vindication of the laboratory sciences. In: Pickering A.(eds) Science as practice and culture. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  39. Hummler, E., Cole, T., Blendy, J., Ganss, R., Aguzzi, A., Schmid, W., Beerman, F., & Schutz, G. (1994). Targeted mutation of the CREB gene: Compensation within the CREB/ATF family of transcription factors. In Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA (Vol. 91, pp. 5647–5651).Google Scholar
  40. Impey S., Obrietan K., Storm D.R. (1999) Making new connections: Role of ERK/MAP kinase signaling in neuronal plasticity. Neuron 23: 11–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kogan J.H., Frankland P.W., Blendy J.A., Coblentz J., Marowitz Z., Shüz G., Silva A.J. (1997) Spaced training induces normal long-term memory in CREB mutant mice. Current Biology 7(1): 1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kogan J.H., Frankland P.W., Silva A.J. (2000) Long-term memory underlying hippocampus- dependent social recognition in mice. Hippocampus 10(1): 47–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Latour B. (1988) The pateurization of France. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  44. Loorende Jong H. (2006) Explicating pluralism: Where the mind to molecular pathway gets off-track. Synthese 151(3): 435–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mayo D. (1991) Novel evidence and severe tests. Philosophy of Science 58: 523–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mayo D. (1996) Error and the growth of experimental knowledge. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  47. Mayo D. (2000) Experimental practice and an error statistical account of evidence. Philosophy of Science 67(3): S193–S207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Messick S. (1989) Validity. In: Linn R.L.(eds) Educational measurement, 3rd ed. Macmillan, New York, pp 13–103Google Scholar
  49. Mitchell S. (2003) Biological complexity and integrative pluralism. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  50. Mitchell S., Dietrich M. (2006) Integration without unification: An argument for pluralism in the biological sciences. American Naturalist 168: S73–S79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Nagel E. (1961) The structure of science: Problems in the logic of scientific explanation. Harcourt, Brace and World, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  52. Richter K., Wolf G., Engelmann M. (2005) Social recognition memory requires two stages of protein synthesis in mice. Learning and Memory 12: 407–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schouten M., Loorende Jong H. (2005) Ruthless reductionism. Philosophical Psychology 18(4): 473–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Selcher J.C., Weeber E.J., Christian J., Nekrasova T., Landreth G., Sweatt J.D. (2003). A Role for ERK MAP Kinase in Physiological Temporal Integration in Hippocampal Area CA1. Learning and Memory 1: 26–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Shadish W., Cook T., Campbell D. (2002) Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Houghton Mifflin Company, BostonGoogle Scholar
  56. Sullivan, J., Memory consolidation, multiple realization and modest reductions. Philosophy of Science Supplement (in press).Google Scholar
  57. Sullivan, J. (2003). Regulation of extracellular signal-regulated kinase during long-term potentiation in area CA1 of the rat hippocampus in vivo. Master’s Thesis, University of Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
  58. Sullivan, J. (2007). Reliability and validity of experiment in the neurobiology of learning and memory. Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
  59. Taylor C. (1964) Explanation of behavior. Prometheus, Amherst, NYGoogle Scholar
  60. Thor D.H., Holloway W.R. (1982) Social memory of the male laboratory rat. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology 96(6): 1000–1006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Watabe A.M., Zaki P.A., O’Dell T.J. (2000) Coactivation of β-adrenergic and cholinergic receptors enhances the induction of long-term potentiation and synergistically activates mitogen-activated protein kinase in the hippocampal CA1 region. The Journal of Neuroscience 20(16): 5924–5931Google Scholar
  62. Wimsatt W. (1981). Robustness, reliability, and overdetermination. In: Brewer M.B., Collins B.E. (Eds). Scientific inquiry and the social sciences. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.Google Scholar
  63. Woodward J. (1989) Data and phenomena. Synthese 79: 393–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Woodward J. (2000) Data, phenomena and reliability. Philosophy of Science 67(3): S163–S179CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of Alabama at BirminghamBirminghamUSA

Personalised recommendations