3.1 Representation in Neuroscience Studies

Animal models (e.g., nonhuman primates, rats, mice) and studies of humans with brain lesions have been helpful in learning about the anatomy of the nervous system and the brain. These studies provide evidence supporting the connection between behavior and the human brain and nervous system. However, scientific findings in neuroscience are limited in generalizability. This section focuses on some of the biases that may exist in the current literature.

It is often assumed that the development of the central nervous system and how neurons communicate tend to be universal across people from different populations. However, it should be acknowledged that there is a lack of diversity in research samples as well as in the neuroscience workforce, both of which lead to potential biases in the interpretation of scientific findings. In addition, demographic characterization of neuroscience research participants is not as well documented or described in scientific reports, which prohibits comparison across groups that would allow for claims of generalizability or group differences (Henrich et al., 2010). Even if we assume the biological underpinnings are universal, it is important to acknowledge one’s cultural experience, given that synapse pruning and neural network consolidation rely heavily on one’s experience. Therefore, diverse samples not only in terms of neurodiversity but also in terms of diversity by social experience (e.g., culture, race/ethnicity, gender) are important for understanding how the brain and nervous system relate to one’s behavior. For example, studies with Black adults consistently show that life experiences with racial discrimination are associated with the neural correlates of vigilance and hyperarousal (e.g., Webb et al., 2022).

Often, people of color or individuals who hold multiple marginalized identities are at higher risk of negative health outcomes than their privileged counterparts. For instance, when compared to their gender and ethnic counterparts, Latina adolescent girls have been identified as having elevated depression and anxiety, which often go untreated (McLaughlin et al., 2007). Yet, they are not represented in fMRI studies examining anxiety and the brain. This speaks to the need for ethnic and racial representation in fMRI studies (Goldfarb & Brown, 2022).

Another bias that is often overlooked relates to the methodological tools used to measure electrophysiological outcomes (La Scala et al., 2023). For instance, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) are the primary tools used in neuroimaging research. Both MRI and fMRI use head coils that are restrictive for use in people with big hair. Additionally, because MRI and fMRI utilize strong magnets that generate a magnetic field to produce images, metal objects can be pulled into the magnets with great force, potentially causing injury or harm. Therefore, people with hair extensions or accessories that use metal are excluded. Both of these exclusions disproportionately affect women identifying as Black and Latina. Similarly, electroencephalography (EEG) and event-related potentials (ERPs) can be sensitive to someone’s skin color and hair type (Penner et al., 2023). Additionally, populations who have little exposure to research and neuroscience methods are prone to experiencing stress and anxiety when undergoing MRIs, which can often interfere with findings (Michalska et al., 2018). Having a more representative neuroscience workforce (e.g., researchers, scholars, technicians, engineers) and engaging in community-based participatory research, where participants of color are given decision-making power in the research process, can reduce, if not eliminate, these existing biases.