When physicists with a Ph.D. judge incongruent statements in biology, where they hold basic expertise, activation overlaps with inhibitory-control regions including left IFG, ACC, insula and superior frontal gyrus¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r1–r2 · q1–q3
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? In biology, incongruent statements recruited left IFG, bilateral ACC, bilateral caudate, right insula, bilateral superior frontal gyrus and right midcingulate gyrus more than congruent statements. → Geneviève Allaire-Duquette 2021 q3 i? The brain activation patterns for naive ideas in biology largely overlap with the nodes of inhibitory control mechanisms. → Geneviève Allaire-Duquette 2021 (2)

Evidence¶

Geneviève Allaire-Duquette 2021¶

Geneviève Allaire-Duquette, Lorie-Marlène Brault Foisy, Patrice Potvin, Martin Riopel, Marilyne Larose, Steve Masson. (2021). An fMRI study of scientists with a Ph.D. in physics confronted with naive ideas in science. npj Science of Learning 6:11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-021-00091-x

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Biology-domain t-contrasts (Tables 4, Fig. 6) in the 25-participant fMRI study; the areas more activated for incongruent statements included left IFG, bilateral ACC, bilateral caudate, right insula, bilateral superior frontal gyrus and right midcingulate gyrus; congruent statements recruited bilateral middle occipital gyrus and left precentral gyrus.

"Our data revealed five brain regions that mediate the performance of physicists with a Ph.D. assessing naive science ideas in biology."

Geneviève Allaire-Duquette 2021 (2)¶

Geneviève Allaire-Duquette, Lorie-Marlène Brault Foisy, Patrice Potvin, Martin Riopel, Marilyne Larose, Steve Masson. (2021). An fMRI study of scientists with a Ph.D. in physics confronted with naive ideas in science. npj Science of Learning 6:11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-021-00091-x

q1 · i? · causal · r1

Authors' interpretation in the discussion of the biology-domain activation pattern, linking the recruited regions to prior findings on inhibitory control; participants had a noticeable 17% error rate when evaluating biology statements.

"The brain activation patterns associated with processing naive ideas in biology seem to largely overlap with the nodes of inhibitory control mechanisms."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• An EXPERTISE × CONGRUENCY interaction in bilateral dorsal ACC shows the congruency effect on BOLD signal is larger for statements in biology, where participants hold basic expertise, than in physics — related
• When physicists with a Ph.D. confront naive ideas in their domain of expertise, MFG and IFG associated with inhibitory control are significantly more activated by incongruent than congruent statements — related
• Judging incongruent statements that trigger naive ideas recruits left IFG, bilateral superior frontal gyrus and bilateral ACC more than judging matched congruent statements — a broader claim this one bears on
• Naive science ideas are extremely persistent and probably never disappear even after extensive training such as a Ph.D. in physics, so conceptual change as replacement may never truly be achieved — related
• Scientists with a Ph.D. in physics respond more slowly to incongruent statements than to matched congruent statements, with a response-time increase in physics twice as large as in biology — related
• Physicists with a Ph.D. are slightly more accurate judging physics statements than biology statements (d = 0.5) — related