One hundred years of neurosciences in the arts and humanities, a bibliometric review.

IF 1.7 4区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Manuel Cebral-Loureda, Jorge Sanabria-Z, Mauricio A Ramírez-Moreno, Irina Kaminsky-Castillo
{"title":"One hundred years of neurosciences in the arts and humanities, a bibliometric review.","authors":"Manuel Cebral-Loureda, Jorge Sanabria-Z, Mauricio A Ramírez-Moreno, Irina Kaminsky-Castillo","doi":"10.1186/s13010-023-00147-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Neuroscientific approaches have historically triggered changes in the conception of creativity and artistic experience, which can be revealed by noting the intersection of these fields of study in terms of variables such as global trends, methodologies, objects of study, or application of new technologies; however, these neuroscientific approaches are still often considered as disciplines detached from the arts and humanities. In this light, the question arises as to what evidence the history of neurotechnologies provides at the intersection of creativity and aesthetic experience.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a century-long bibliometric analysis of key parameters in multidisciplinary studies published in the Scopus database. Screening techniques based on the PRISMA method and advanced data analysis techniques were applied to 3612 documents metadata from the years 1922 to 2022. We made graphical representations of the results applying algorithmic and clusterization processes to keywords and authors relationships.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From the analyses, we found a) a shift from a personality-focus quantitative analysis to a field-focus qualitative approach, considering topics such as art, perception, aesthetics and beauty; b) The locus of interest in fMRI-supported neuroanatomy has been shifting toward EEG technologies and models based on machine learning and deep learning in recent years; c) four main clusters were identified in the study approaches: humanistic, creative, neuroaesthetic and medical; d) the neuroaesthetics cluster is the most central and relevant, mediating between creativity and neuroscience; e) neuroaesthetics and neuroethics are two of the neologism that better characterizes the challenges that this convergence of studies will have in the next years.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Through a longitudinal analysis, we evidenced the great influence that neuroscience is having on the thematic direction of the arts and humanities. The perspective presented shows how this field is being consolidated and helps to define it as a new opportunity of great potential for future researchers.</p>","PeriodicalId":56062,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy Ethics and Humanities in Medicine","volume":"18 1","pages":"17"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10633938/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy Ethics and Humanities in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13010-023-00147-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Neuroscientific approaches have historically triggered changes in the conception of creativity and artistic experience, which can be revealed by noting the intersection of these fields of study in terms of variables such as global trends, methodologies, objects of study, or application of new technologies; however, these neuroscientific approaches are still often considered as disciplines detached from the arts and humanities. In this light, the question arises as to what evidence the history of neurotechnologies provides at the intersection of creativity and aesthetic experience.

Methods: We conducted a century-long bibliometric analysis of key parameters in multidisciplinary studies published in the Scopus database. Screening techniques based on the PRISMA method and advanced data analysis techniques were applied to 3612 documents metadata from the years 1922 to 2022. We made graphical representations of the results applying algorithmic and clusterization processes to keywords and authors relationships.

Results: From the analyses, we found a) a shift from a personality-focus quantitative analysis to a field-focus qualitative approach, considering topics such as art, perception, aesthetics and beauty; b) The locus of interest in fMRI-supported neuroanatomy has been shifting toward EEG technologies and models based on machine learning and deep learning in recent years; c) four main clusters were identified in the study approaches: humanistic, creative, neuroaesthetic and medical; d) the neuroaesthetics cluster is the most central and relevant, mediating between creativity and neuroscience; e) neuroaesthetics and neuroethics are two of the neologism that better characterizes the challenges that this convergence of studies will have in the next years.

Conclusions: Through a longitudinal analysis, we evidenced the great influence that neuroscience is having on the thematic direction of the arts and humanities. The perspective presented shows how this field is being consolidated and helps to define it as a new opportunity of great potential for future researchers.

神经科学在艺术和人文学科的一百年,文献计量学综述。
背景:神经科学方法在历史上引发了创造力和艺术体验概念的变化,这可以通过注意这些研究领域在全球趋势、方法论、研究对象或新技术应用等变量方面的交叉来揭示;然而,这些神经科学方法仍然经常被认为是脱离艺术和人文学科的学科。有鉴于此,神经技术史在创造力和审美体验的交叉点上提供了什么证据,这是一个问题。方法:我们对Scopus数据库中发表的多学科研究的关键参数进行了长达一个世纪的文献计量学分析。基于PRISMA方法的筛选技术和先进的数据分析技术应用于1922年至2022年的3612份文档元数据。我们将算法和聚类过程应用于关键词和作者关系,对结果进行了图形表示。结果:从分析中,我们发现a)从注重个性的定量分析转向注重领域的定性分析,考虑了艺术、感知、美学和美等主题;b) 近年来,功能磁共振成像支持的神经解剖学的兴趣点已经转向基于机器学习和深度学习的脑电图技术和模型;c) 研究方法主要分为四类:人文主义、创造性、神经美学和医学;d) 神经美学集群是最核心和最相关的,介于创造力和神经科学之间;e) 神经美学和神经伦理学是两个新词,更好地描述了这种研究融合在未来几年将面临的挑战。结论:通过纵向分析,我们证明了神经科学对艺术和人文学科主题方向的巨大影响。所呈现的观点显示了该领域是如何被巩固的,并有助于将其定义为未来研究人员具有巨大潜力的新机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Philosophy Ethics and Humanities in Medicine
Philosophy Ethics and Humanities in Medicine Arts and Humanities-History and Philosophy of Science
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine considers articles on the philosophy of medicine and biology, and on ethical aspects of clinical practice and research. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine is an open access, peer-reviewed online journal that encompasses all aspects of the philosophy of medicine and biology, and the ethical aspects of clinical practice and research. It also considers papers at the intersection of medicine and humanities, including the history of medicine, that are relevant to contemporary philosophy of medicine and bioethics. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine is the official publication of the Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics at Georgetown University Medical Center.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信