Cognitive Neuroscience: A Very Short Introduction

Very Short Introductions #489

by Richard Passingham

Up to the 1960s, psychology was deeply under the influence of behaviourism, which focused on stimuli and responses, and regarded consideration of what may happen in the mind as unapproachable scientifically. This began to change with the devising of methods to try to tap into what was going on in the 'black box' of the mind, and the development of 'cognitive psychology'. With the study of patients who had suffered brain damage or injury to limited parts of the brain, outlines of brain components and processes began to take shape, and by the end of the 1970s, a new science, cognitive neuroscience, was born. But it was with the development of ways of accessing activation of the working brain using imaging techniques such as PET and fMRI that cognitive neuroscience came into its own, as a science cutting across psychology and neuroscience, with strong connections to philosophy of mind. Experiments involving subjects in scanners while doing various tasks, thinking, problem solving, and remembering are shedding light on the brain processes involved. The research is exciting and new, and often makes media headlines. But there is much misunderstanding about what brain imaging tells us, and the interpretation of studies on cognition.

In this Very Short Introduction Richard Passingham, a distinguished cognitive neuroscientist, gives a provocative and exciting account of the nature and scope of this relatively new field, and the techniques available to us, focusing on investigation of the human brain. He explains what brain imaging shows, pointing out common misconceptions, and gives a brief overview of the different aspects of human cognition: perceiving, attending, remembering, reasoning, deciding, and acting. Passingham concludes with a discussion of the exciting advances that may lie ahead.

ABOUT THE SERIES: The Very Short Introductions series from Oxford University Press contains hundreds of titles in almost every subject area. These pocket-sized books are the perfect way to get ahead in a new subject quickly. Our expert authors combine facts, analysis, perspective, new ideas, and enthusiasm to make interesting and challenging topics highly readable.

Genres: Science, Psychology, Neuroscience, Nonfiction, Brain, Medicine, Biology

160 pages, Paperback

First published December 1, 2016

Reviews

[Orestis · Rating 4 out of 5]

The technical nature of this book can make it hard to follow entirely at times, but it remains accessible and interesting, and so a good first contact with neuroscience.

[Crito · Rating 4 out of 5]

Solid overview of the field, the questions it asks, its methods, and examples of findings in representative but not comprehensive examples. My only bone is with chapter 7 which glosses over the serious controversies of the Libet experiments; reading this you might get the impression only dualists took issue with it, when there are significant methodological and physicalist objections. If the fundamental assumptions are off, then needless to say the later fMRI reproductions share the same faults. That shook my confidence a little, but the rest seems sound. If you're interested in philosophy of mind you have to take a peak over the fence eventually, and this isn't a bad start.

[Rick Sam · Rating 2 out of 5]

A quick introductory book to Cognitive Neuroscience.

This book gives you a fact based approach of the brain.

I wasn't looking for facts about Brain. Actually, I was looking for theoretical,
conceptual schools of thought. This would give me ideas to borrow, and apply in research.

Let me give you the outline:

Perceiving,
Attention,
Remembering,
Reasoning,
Deciding,
Checking,
Acting,
The Future.

My favorite part of the book was, Meta-cognition, "Think about Thinking."

Educators would appreciate it. They'd like to teach students to think. In turn, they'd be enabled to be life-long learners.

I couldn't find answer for Raven’s Matrices, Figure 14.

My Answer is (2) -- Can you tell me, if it's correct? Thanks

Interesting that our Fluid Intelligence decreases with age.

Crystallized Intelligence increases, (accumulation of knowledge, experience) with age.

I’d suggest watching lectures of Jordan Peterson, Canadian Clinical Psychologist.

If you are learning about Brain, Psychology, Neuroscience, A.I Research, I'd suggest this short

Introduction.

Deus Vult,
Gottfried

[N · Rating 3 out of 5]

Notes
fMRI lit up areas are called ‘activation’ not activity because it is indirect measurement of ratio of oxygenated blood (assuming this increases with neuronal activity but not certain)

fMRI shows differences vs control. So checking what lights up when thinking about use of objects, needs to be subtracted from control of what lights up when thinking about the objects and responding (seeing, identifying, talking vs processing)

Amygdala activation for depressed people, same as people thinking sad thoughts, so we don’t really have a link between Amygdala and depression, instead just the state of the brain while thinking sad thoughts, which depressed people do

Ventromedial PFC lights up when Pepsi-fans drink Pepsi, and Coke-fans drink Coke. Doesn’t explain anything about why they prefer one or the other. No causal link, just a representation of the brain state of which we see external behavioral data

We have a somatic map but it’s distorted, so more tissues dedicated to hands than feet. Center of field of vision vs Peripheral. Somatic map also explains amputees feeling ghost limb.

Visual cortex perceives in stages. 1st set of neurons just the elements, then this gets integrated in higher order groups of neurons so we identify objects, classify them etc.

We build a view-independent representation of objects, such that even if it looks different from different angles, we perceive it as the same object. Connect with ‘adaptive suppression’ where we focus on novel stimuli, relegating unchanging objects to background of attention. How would our view-independent representation be affected if we didn’t have adaptive suppression? On the flip side, how much of our novelty-dopamine is designed for the exact opposite job, to form a platonic view-independent view of unchanging objects, ie using novelty to build a more complete view of the un-novel.

Senses are integrated, and in layers, so localized damage will affect specific things leaving other seemingly connected things untouched. Blindsight. Can’t identify but can use, can identify but can’t perceive movement: Patient LM saw world in snapshots

If 100M neurons, why should there be bandwidth issue of attention? Unless two parallel processes are competing streams of information in same process.

Prefrontal eyelid sends top-down signals during mental tasks that increases activation in relevant parts of brain and decreases activation in distractors like pain, even releasing opiates.

Why should there be bottleneck, like audio and visual info merging at ventral PFC? To keep flexible reaction, if any output to be secured by any input, need common interconnected matrix where you can combine as you please

Difference between episodic memory (event) in hippocampus vs semantic memory (knowlededge/facts) in perirhinal cortex.

Remembering names is particularly hard semantic task (most people have too many similarities in features/behavior/relevance), and so particularly sensitive to aging.

Hippocampus generates image of my location in space, so memories have a spatial aspect, and forgetfulness also manifests in inability to find my way around, remember directions

Analogical reasoning ativates parietal cortex because these are similar to size and distance relationships. So I can think and reason without language, without hearing ‘inner speech’ like thos with temporal lobe lesions.

Need to rethink PFC/Brain from tiny homunculus controller to a piece of transformation circuitry between input and output.

Ventral PFC has connections to sense modalities in different parts of brain - hearing, touch, vision etc. Orbital PFC connected to Amygdala/hypothalamus. So PFC gets a picture of current needs. Dorsal PFC connects to pre-motor areas and dictates action.

PFC not as CEO but as middle manager: Is rote activity meditative because it doesn’t need the PFC, so all the various lobes of brain can still be high functioning (touching, doing, hearing, spatial awareness etc) without having to aggregate information to a middle manager PFC.

Phenomenology of Utility: taste in mouth and warmth in hand each correspond to a signal in the ventromedial PFC. The strength of the signal is not based on the intensity of the stimulus, but by the subjective opinion on pleasure of the stimulus, which had no correlation with intensity. Somewhere, the physical attributes of the stimulus (temperature) has been converted to my own idiosyncratic utility-value which is then the signal the PFC has. This explains why some people might find chillies torture vs tasty.

Choosing immediate gratification: less activation in ventromedial PFC when imagining the future reward. Similarly, underestimate cost of future, so engage in gambling.

Understanding the feelings of others also activate ventromedial PFC, like imagining juice.

Just because there is activation before I become aware of making a decision, doesn’t mean I don’t have free will. I run on auto-pilot, so in activities on which I am highly trained, like a musician, my awareness comes much later than the electrical signal. Then I have veto power. When I am aware of errors (anterior cingulate activation), then the same decision shows much more dorsal PFC activation the next time around.

When playing violin shown visual stimulus, visual cortex lights up until I figure out the pattern and learn the rhythm, then cerebellum becomes dominant. Each action becomess the cue for the next, as opposed to looking towards some objective.

[Sepehr Gourabi · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read this book twice. At the first time, I understood all the information that I need. But the second time helped me to learn more patterns between the explanations and mind map. This book helped me to correct some false information about Cognitive Neuroscience. In my opinion Book needs more interesting topic.

[Vinicius Apolinario · Rating 3 out of 5]

Um bom livro para tirar algumas curiosidades sobre neurociência, e ter noção sobre bibliografias posteriores mais completas e relevantes. O autor foca, exclusivamente, nos estudos baseados em brain imaging, isto é, como a informação flui de uma área do cérebro para outra.
O livro não peca no seu propósito, mas, sinceramente, não gostei muito desse modelo do "short introduction". Achei resumido além do necessário. Porém, acredito que possa ser útil para outras pessoas. Ainda lerei algum outro livro dessa coleção para saber se mudaria de ideia ou não.
Ah... e certamente lerei os livros indispensáveis das neurociências cognitivas, do Michael Gazzaniga.

[Bernie Gourley · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book provides a brief overview of cognitive neuroscience, a discipline that has really only been around for the past few decades, one that uses technologies allowing scientists to see what parts of the brain are active during a given mental activity. The reader learns what parts of the brain are involved in the various activities of being human from perception through action, and what can go wrong with these processes. While that sounds simple and straightforward, the immense complexity of the brain makes it anything but, and there is a lot of medical jargon and qualifying statements to explain how a given relationship between brain location and activity isn’t as simple or well understood as we are frequently led to believe. [Any plain and direct explanation of the brain workings is likely to be at best partial truth, and more likely outright deceptive.]

I found the organization of this book to be logical and conducive to learning about this complex and technical topic. The first chapter, “A Recent Field,” describes what cognitive neuroscience is and where it fits in among the various sciences that deal with mental activity including, psychology, psychiatry, etc. This gives one an idea of both how cognitive neuroscience can contribute to our understanding of mental activity, but also where its limitations lie and why it has not displaced all the other disciplines.

Chapters two through eight make up the core of the book and present an exploration of the various aspects of mental activity and what has been learned about them through studies in this field. The progression is logical and elementary: perception (Ch. 2,) attention (Ch. 3,) memory (Ch. 4,) reasoning (Ch. 5,) decision (Ch. 6,) confirmation / checking (Ch. 7,) and finally action (Ch. 8.) In each chapter practical questions are discussed, questions that will be of interest to readers whose goal is not vocabular expansion, in addition to the discussion of what brain region is involved with what activity. What kinds of questions? How amputees “feel” pain from the missing part of the body? Why humans suck at multitasking, and under what circumstances they can do better at it? How come people who have amnesia remember how to talk and engage in physical activities? Is there free will, and – if so – in what sense? Do we think in language? Etc.

The last chapter reflects upon the future of the discipline. Over the course of the book, the reader learns the limitations of what functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) and Positron Emission Tomography (PET) scans can tell one about what is happening with the brain, and in this chapter one is introduced to the next generation of technologies that may take our level of understanding to another level.

This book has an excellent feature that I don’t recall seeing in other AVSI books. (That is probably, in part, because many of them don’t need it like this one because their subject matter is more readily grasped.) Said feature is a text box at the beginning of the chapter that asks some relatively rudimentary and practical questions, and then – at the end of the chapter – those questions are answered in another box. I think the author recognized that there was a high degree of risk of losing readers if the entire book was, “and when you do decide how many minutes to microwave your Hot Pocket, the temporo-parietal junction works in conjunction with the …” [not an actual quote fragment] he would produce book of limited benefit. [i.e. it would be too technical for the neophyte reader who just wants some practical insight (the AVSI target demographic,) but not technical enough for students of brain anatomy.] These text boxes help keep the reader focused on what is being conveyed while not getting too caught up in arcane terminology.

Other ancillary matter includes graphics (photographs of technology and readouts and diagrams showing where brain areas are located,) references, and a further reading section.

I found this book to have some intriguing discussions on interesting topics. That said, those discussions are interlaced with some necessarily complicated and dense subject matter (that’s the nature of the discipline.) That said, I think the author recognized his challenge and the question boxes and answer boxes that bookended the core chapters were very useful in offering focus for a non-expert reader. It you want a bare-bones overview of cognitive neuroscience, it’s worth reading this slim volume.

[Tiago F · Rating 4 out of 5]

I've read some cognitive science in the past, but it's a topic that is gigantic and easy to forget. So I wanted to refresh my memory, and I've always loved Oxford's introductions. It's written by Richard Passingham who is one of the most cited neuroscientists, particularly known for his work on decision making.

The book is nicely divided into basic aspects of cognition: perceiving, attending, remembering, reasoning, deciding, checking and acting. Each has several subtopics to illustrate a specific point about that cognitive task.

I expected the book to be easier to read. While it's accessible as a whole, some parts were overly technical for the context of this book, especially in the first half. Even though I have studied so much psychology and dabbled into neuroscience here and there, brain talk can quickly get very difficult.

But it was only some parts, and as the book progressed it seemed to get better. I particularly enjoyed how the author tried to describe how the process of science itself works. How the experiments were conducted, and why they were conducted that way. I wish more books covered the research like this but it's fairly rare.

The book also tried to connect its topics to practical matters, which was well done. Some of them are classics of psychology, such as synesthesia or pain in amputees. But some would probably incite the curiosity out of anyone, such as why is it dangerous to use a mobile phone when driving, or why can't we tickle ourselves?

None of the topics covered went very in-depth, as expected from an introduction of this size. But it's still enough to get a good grasp of the field and I learned a fair bit. I was surprised to learn that tests of fluid intelligence don't get affected with temporal lobe injuries (which are related to semantic knowledge), but only with parietal cortex injuries, who can affect reasoning. This adds to the validity of culturally neutral IQ tests measuring true fluid intelligence. I've read a fair bit on intelligence and never came across this somehow.

The topic about driving and mobile phones was very enjoyable to read also which describes how the brain has parallel processing (unlike a computer), but when sensory input has to be transformed into behaviour there is a bottleneck and therefore a delay to act if something unexpected happens.

The last chapter was a bit of a let-down which tried to talk about the future of the field. He was quite conservative which has its benefits but a different approach could have been taken. Nevertheless, as a whole, it's a very solid book if you want to get into the field, despite being more difficult than it should in some areas.

Make sure that you have a good reason to pick cognitive neuroscience instead of cognitive science or cognitive psychology. Unless you have a specific reason to be interested in brain anatomy, the latter two are better suited.

[Julian Meynell · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have not read any of A Very Short Introduction series before this and ordered it fro the library without realizing quite how short an introduction it actually was . The book is on its way to being an extended pamphlet. Having said that it is meant to capture an overview of current cognitive neuroscience and to give a sense of the discoveries and implications of the field. It necessarily simplifies the subject matter.

Given all of that the book is very good. I found it very readable. Passingham has an eccentric and fairly informal and charming writing style. At times he writes like a scientist at others as if he is speaking to a child, but for the most part you feel like you are sitting in his living room and having him explain things to you.

It's about as good a book as a general introduction to this field could be. If he succeeds in actually explaining the core and essential parts of the field, I cannot say, because I was need of a general introduction as I know virtually nothing about the field.

[Jarmaro · Rating 3 out of 5]

Comes up short of what I expected to get out of it as a future student of cognitivism. While the book does introduce the reader to important aspects of the field such as fMRI, the importance of understanding how brain processes information and overview of some basics facts, ultimately the book does not provide solid understanding of the field, even while knowing it's supposed to be a very short introduction.
I was particularly annoyed by the way brain has been showcased in the images, it's incredibly difficult for a layman to comprehend which part of the brain is being talked about when all the author uses are pointed arrows without much elaboration, which is exacerbated by occasional vertical switching of the image. Even a basic front/back labeling could help someone not yet familiar with the physical structure of the brain.
The inclusion of additional recommended literature at the end is a welcome sight, mollifying some of the book difficult explanations by forwarding the reader to more advanced literature. I do not regret reading the book, but I'm satisfied with what it is.

[Laura · Rating 1 out of 5]

So, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so.

Write like a proper adult, you idiot.

The relative pronoun ‘that’ for ‘people’… (*cringes)

[Alex · Rating 3 out of 5]

A fair introduction to some of the content of the subject, but unfulfilling as an introduction, more like a very short textbook. Exploring examples and case studies without going into why they are being carried out. I would have liked to see at least some consideration of how the field as a whole came about, how it functions, what its motivations are, and what its underlying philosophy is. How does a cognitive neuroscientist go about research? How do they approach it? Instead, it jumps straight into examples without providing a useful explication of what they are trying to achieve and how. I was for a more rigorous account of how cognitive neuroscience is a subject distinct from neuroscience, psychology, etc.

[Benno Krojer · Rating 3 out of 5]

I like the questions he addresses a lot so I definitely learnt something. But I feel like it could've been much better than that. The technical details were not introduced in a structured manner and augmented with too simplistic visuals.
I liked the idea of having several intuitive questions at the beginning of each chapter to motivate the concept. However the author could've used them more as a theme in the text.
In general, after now reading two pop-science books on neuroscience, I feel like I have touched a lot of anecdotes and some general methods (e.g. fMRI). The next step is something more rigorous.

[Jonathan · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm a bit on the edge here. I think it's a decent introduction and I love the topic, but I also feel like it requires excessive amounts of neuroanatomical knowledge for an introduction. Perhaps when I finally get around to studying neuroanatomy I will revisit this book, but then I could also just start reading a textbook...

Anyways, one other thing to keep in mind is that neuroscience, and especially the subfield of cognitive neuroscience, moves relatively fast and this book is already 10 years old.

[Nigel Bamber · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really liked the structure of this book. Each chapter starts with layman level questions about human behavioural traits, and then addresses them in terms of empirical findings about brain structure and connectivity. It's one the best popular science books I've read about brain function and really bangs the last nails into the coffin of mind/body duality.

There was a particularly good explanation of the structural aspects behind the Fast and Slow Thinking behaviour identified by Daniel Kahnemann. Fast connections using heuristic responses learned by repetition, versus slower responses requiring rational evaluation. Fast Thinking does allow effective multi-tasking, but there are dangers to this approach when novel situations arise.

I was also intrigues to see how the long-term planning of delayed gratification and mitigation strategies for potential future risks, depends heavily on the individuals ability to imagine (even to a sensory level) what those risks or benefits might feel like if they occurred. I have always thought that non-altruistic bravery could be described as a lack of imagination of the potential consequences of an action.

Exposure and participation in Art is often held to be a beneficial experience in the development of an imaginative capability. Perhaps this is a strong argument for the importance of Art in the human race's continued survival.

[Sabrina Burton · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was amazing, it really was a short introduction but very easy to read for a first year neuroscience student, although some people may find having a dictionary of some form nearby useful. The layout is very handy posing questions then showing evidence before giving an answer at the end of the chapter. An excellent book for anyone interested in how the brain works and not too long.

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very clear and concise introduction, with lots of motivating questions to help reader's understand why this field is important and interesting. It's short, so nothing is explained in too much detail, but there are loads of references, and enough rewarding vignettes (like the discussion of gestural vs. spoken language and evolution) to make this a pleasure to read.

[Kieran Desmond · Rating 4 out of 5]

helped a lot to frame my understanding of the cognitive and behavioral neuroscience course. Gave nice introductory synopses of all the core aspects of cognition; perceiving, attending, remembering, reasoning, deciding, checking and acting. The final chapter gave some brief but insightful suggestions about future directions of the field.
definitely not a waste of time.

[Alex K. Baechle · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book helped me in my bio psychology class. It was not required reading, but having another perspective helped me lock in some of the key concepts. It would have been a better book if it discussed in greater detail the aims of cognitive neuroscience. Why is this an important field to increase our understanding? Etc.

[Pepe Silvia · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sehr viele interessante neurowissenschaftliche Erkenntnisse auf sehr verständliche Weise heruntergebrochen. Empfehlenswert wenn man in der Philosophie des Geistes Ängste aufbaut sich zu sehr von der Empirie zu entfernen. Sehr viel Terminologie, aber für dieses Thema angemessen. Hat genau das geliefert was ich erwartet habe, daher 5/5.
Werde es defintiv mehrere Male lesen müssen.

[Tien Manh · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Very short introduction" on how cognitive neuroscience experiments are performed (EEGs, PETs, MRIs, fMRIs...), different parts of the brain, and its relation to memory, perception, awareness, voluntary control, decision making...

Dispels the "ghost in the machine", and I like brains, so 5/5.

[Lia (areaderswords) · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is the first book I read on the subject and despite lack of background, I find it quite accessible and easy to follow. Not overly technical that it hindered understanding, yet detailed enough to provide leads for more in depth reading.

[Ryan]

Lau and Haynes have shown with fMRI that the brain shows activity of an intention before we are consciously aware of deciding what we are to do. This implies there is no dualism, or no difference between mind and brain.

[Nilendu Misra · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very padestrian and stiff. It is not easy to functionally map perception to brain histology using plain text and a couple of hand drawn diagrams. But author’s “three questions” to start every chapter and answering those succinctly at the end was a very good, and novel, technique.

[Cristian Calin · Rating 4 out of 5]

The names of the parts of the brain were fairly difficult to follow, but the ideas are clear. I think I'd want to know more about how the experiments were set, because right now it feels that researchers simply scan the brain during every random task they can think of.

[Mathieu · Rating 4 out of 5]

Delivers on its promise.

[Kevin · Rating 2 out of 5]

Lots of interesting information but the writing style was a bit dreary.

[Aida Saldana Hernandez · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very good introduction to cognitive neuroscience.

[Jeremy Lindsay · Rating 2 out of 5]

shockingly bad writing

[Yang · Rating 5 out of 5]

很精简的一本小书，不过信息量蛮大的，很多主题都涉及了一下，知道了不少奇奇怪怪的脑区名字。后面的Reference也挺好的。