Advertisement

Experimental Entanglements: Social Science and Neuroscience Beyond Interdisciplinarity

  • Des Fitzgerald
  • Felicity Callard

Abstract

This chapter is an account of the dynamics of interaction across the social sciences and neurosciences. Against an arid rhetoric of ‘interdisciplinarity’, we call for a more expansive imaginary of what experiment—as practice and ethos—might offer. We oppose existing conceptualizations of dynamics between the social sciences and neurosciences, grouping them under three rubrics: ‘critique’, ‘ebullience’ and ‘interaction’. Despite their differences, each insists on a distinction between sociocultural and neurobiological knowledge. We link this insistence to the ‘regime of the inter-’, an ethic of interdisciplinarity that guides interaction between disciplines on the understanding of their separateness. We argue: (1) that this separation is no longer sustainable and (2) that the cognitive neuroscience experiment offers opportunities for exploring this realization.

Notes

Funding

The original version of this chapter was completed while DF was funded by an Interacting Minds Centre project on Neuroscientific Evidence, at Aarhus University (Denmark), and by an ESRC (UK) Transformative grant on ‘A New Sociology for a New Century’ (ES/L003074/1). FC’s research when she wrote this chapter was supported by two Wellcome Trust Strategic Awards to Durham University (WT086049 and WT098455MA). Both DF and FC also gratefully acknowledge an award from the Volkswagen Foundation’s Second European Platform for Life Sciences, Mind Sciences and Humanities, which funded a workshop on ‘Experimental Entanglements in Cognitive Neuroscience’. We remain grateful to the Wellcome Trust for enabling us to make this chapter Open Access (and thus permitting its free reprinting here).

Bibliography

  1. Abi-Rached, Joelle M. 2008. The New Brain Sciences: Field or Fields? Brain Self & Society Working Papers, Consulted September 2012. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/27941/1/BSSWP-2-2008-FINAL.pdf
  2. Adolphs, Ralph. 2003. Cognitive Neuroscience of Human Social Behaviour. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 4 (3): 165–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ashton, Jennifer. 2011 Two Problems with a Neuroaesthetic Theory of Interpretation. Nonsite (2), Consulted August 2013. http://nonsite.org/issues/issue-2/two-problems-with-a-neuroaesthetic-theory-of-interpretation
  4. Bandettini, Peter A. 2012. Functional MRI: A Confluence of Fortunate Circumstances. NeuroImage 61 (2): A3–A11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barad, Karen. 2007. Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. ———. 2011. Erasers and Erasures: Pinch’s Unfortunate “Uncertainty Principle”. Social Studies of Science 41 (3): 443–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barnett, Clive. 2008. Political Affects in Public Space: Normative Blind-spots in Non-representational Ontologies. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 33 (2): 186–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beaulieu, Anne. 2000. The space inside the skull: digital representations, brain mapping, and cognitive neuroscience in the decade of the brain. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  9. Le Bihan, Denis, et al. 2001. Diffusion Tensor Imaging: Concepts and Applications. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging 13 (4): 534–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bird, Adrian. 2007. Perceptions of Epigenetics. Nature 447 (7143): 396–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Blackman, Lisa. 2008. Affect, Relationality and the “Problem of Personality”. Theory, Culture & Society 25 (1): 23–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bluhm, Robyn, Heidi L. Maibom, and Anne Jaap Jacobson. 2012. Neurofeminism: Issues at the Intersection of Feminist Theory and Cognitive Science. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. De Boer, Karin, and Ruth Sonderegger, eds. 2012. Conceptions of Critique in Modern and Contemporary Philosophy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  14. Braidotti, Rosi. 2006. Posthuman, All Too Human: Towards a New Process Ontology. Theory, Culture & Society 23 (7-8): 197–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Callard, Felicity, and Daniel Margulies. 2011. The Subject at Rest: Novel Conceptualizations of Self and Brain from Cognitive Neuroscience’s Study of the “Resting State”. Subjectivity 4 (3): 227–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. ———. 2014. What we Talk about When we Talk about the Default Mode Network. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 8: 169. doi:  10.3389/fnhum.2014.00619.
  17. Callard, Felicity, and Des Fitzgerald. 2015. Rethinking Interdisciplinarity across the Social Sciences and Neurosciences. London: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Callard, Felicity, Jonathan Smallwood, Johannes Golchert, and Daniel S. Margulies. 2013. The Era of the Wandering Mind? Twenty-First Century Research on Self-Generated Mental Activity. Frontiers in Psychology 4 (891). doi:  10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00891.
  19. Camerer, Colin, George Lowenstein, and Drazen Prelec. 2005. Neuroeconomics: How Neuroscience Can Inform Economics. Journal of Economic Literature 43 (1): 9–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chiao, Joan Y. 2009. Cultural Neuroscience: a Once and Future Discipline. Progress in Brain Research 178: 287–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Choudhury, Suparna, and Laurence J. Kirmayer. 2009. Cultural Neuroscience and Psychopathology: Prospects for Cultural Psychiatry. Progress in Brain Research 178: 263–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Choudhury, Suparna, Saskia K. Nagel, and Jan Slaby. 2009. Critical Neuroscience: Linking Neuroscience and Society through Critical Practice. BioSocieties 4 (1): 61–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Choudhury, Suparna, and Jan Slaby, eds. 2012. Critical Neuroscience: A Handbook of the Social and Cultural Contexts of Neuroscience. London: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  24. Clifford, James, and George E. Marcus. 1986. Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  25. Clough, Patricia T. 2000. Comments on Setting Criteria for Experimental Writing. Qualitative Inquiry 6 (2): 278–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Cohn, Simon. 2008. Making Objective Facts from Intimate Relations: The Case of Neuroscience and Its Entanglements with Volunteers. History of the Human Sciences 21 (4): 86–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Connolly, William E. 2002. Neuropolitics: Thinking, Culture, Speed. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  28. Cooter, Roger. 2014. Neural Veils and the Will to Historical Critique: Why Historians of Science need to take the Neuro-Turn Seriously. Isis 105 (1): 145–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Cromby, John. 2007. Integrating Social Science with Neuroscience: Potentials and Problems. BioSocieties 2 (2): 149–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Cromby, John, Tim Newton, and Simon J. Williams. 2011. Neuroscience and Subjectivity. Subjectivity 4 (3): 215–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Damasio, Antonio. 2000. The Feeling Of What Happens: Body, Emotion and the Making of Consciousness. London: Vintage.Google Scholar
  32. ———. 2004. Looking for Spinoza: Joy, Sorrow and the Feeling Brain. London: Vintage.Google Scholar
  33. ———. 2006. Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain. London: Vintage.Google Scholar
  34. Davies, Gail. 2010. Where Do Experiments End? Geoforum 41 (5): 667–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Donzelot, Jacques. 1988. The Promotion of the Social. Economy and Society 17 (3): 395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Dumit, Joseph. 2004. Picturing Personhood: Brain Scans and Biomedical Identity. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  37. European Commission 2011. Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of The Council Establishing Horizon 2020—The Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014–2020), Consulted August 2013. http://ec.europa.eu/research/horizon2020/pdf/proposals/proposal_for_a_regulation_of_the_european_parliament_and_of_the_council_establishing_horizon_2020_-_the_framework_programme_for_research_and_innovation_(2014-2020).pdf#view=fit&pagemode=none
  38. Filevich, Elisa, et al. 2013. Brain Correlates of Subjective Freedom of Choice. Consciousness and Cognition 22 (4): 1274–1281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Fitzgerald, Des. 2013. The Affective Labour of Autism Neuroscience: Entangling Emotions, Thoughts and Feelings in a Scientific Research Practice. Subjectivity 6: 131–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Fitzgerald, Des, Melissa M. Littlefield, Kasper J. Knudsen, James Tonks, and Martin J. Dietz. 2014. Ambivalence, Equivocation and the Politics of Experimental Knowledge: A Transdisciplinary Neuroscience Encounter. Social Studies of Science 44 (5): 701–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Frackowiak, Richard S.J., et al. 2004. Human Brain Function. 2nd ed. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  42. Franks, David D. 2010. Neurosociology: The Nexus Between Neuroscience and Social Psychology. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Galison, Peter. 1987. How Experiments End. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  44. ———. 1997. Image and Logic: A Material Culture of Microphysics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  45. Goldstein, Kurt. 2000 [1939]. The Organism. Boston, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  46. Gooding, David, Trevor Pinch, and Simon Schaffer. 1989. The Uses of Experiment: Studies in the Natural Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Goodman, Alan H. 2013. Bringing Culture into Human Biology and Biology Back into Anthropology. American Anthropologist 115 (3): 359–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Grosz, Elizabeth A. 1994. Volatile Bodies: Toward a Corporeal Feminism. Bloomington. IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Hacking, Ian. 1983. Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Haraway, Donna J. 1997. Modest_Witness@Second_Millennium.FemaleMan_Meets_OncoMouse: Feminism and Technoscience. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  51. ———. 1991. Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. New York: Free Association Books.Google Scholar
  52. Hyman, S.E. 2009. How Adversity Gets Under the Skin. Nature Neuroscience 12 (3): 241–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Johnston, Adrian, and Cathrine Malabou. 2013. Self and Emotional Life Philosophy, Psychoanalysis, and Neuroscience. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Joyce, Kelly A. 2008. Magnetic Appeal MRI and the Myth of Transparency. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Kirmayer, Laurence J., and Ian Gold. 2012. Re-Socializing Psychiatry: Critical Neuroscience and the Limits of Reductionism. In Critical Neuroscience: A Handbook of the Social and Cultural Contexts of Neuroscience, ed. S. Choudhury and J. Slaby, 315–347. London: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  56. Kramnick, Jonathan. 2011. Against literary Darwinism. Critical Inquiry 37 (2): 315–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Laplanche, Jean. 1989. New Foundations for Psychoanalysis. Trans. David Macey. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  58. Latour, Bruno. 1999. Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Boston: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  59. ———. 2004. Why Has Critique Run Out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern. Critical Inquiry 30 (2): 225–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. ———. 2005. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Lende, Daniel H., and Greg Downey. 2012. The Encultured Brain: An Introduction to Neuroanthropology. Boston, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  62. Lewin, Kurt. 1947. Frontiers in Group Dynamics. Human Relations 1 (5): 5–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Leys, Ruth. 2011. The Turn to Affect: A Critique. Critical Inquiry 37 (3): 434–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Littlefield, Melissa M., Martin J. Dietz, Des Fitzgerald, Kasper J. Knudsen, and James Tonks. 2014. Contextualizing Neuro-Collaborations: Reflections on a Trans-Disciplinary fMRI Lie Detection Experiment. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 8: 149. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. ———. 2015. Being Asked to Tell an Unpleasant Truth About Another Person Activates Anterior Insula and Prefrontal Cortex. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 9: 553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Malabou, Catherine. 2008. What Should We Do with Our Brain? Trans. S. Rand. New York: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
  67. ———. 2012. The New Wounded: From Neurosis to Brain Damage. Trans. S. Miller. New York: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Marres, Noortje. 2012. On Some Uses and Abuses of Topology in the Social Analysis of Technology (Or the Problem with Smart Meters). Theory, Culture & Society 29 (4-5): 288–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Martin, Emily. 2000. AES Presidential Address—Mind-Body Problems. American Ethnologist 27 (3): 569–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. ———. 2004. Talking Back to Neuro-reductionism. In Cultural Bodies: Ethnography and Theory, ed. H. Thomas and J. Ahmed, 190–211. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. ———. 2010. Self-making and the Brain. Subjectivity 3 (4): 366–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. ———. 2013. The Potentiality of Ethnography and the Limits of Affect Theory. Current Anthropology 54 (7): s149–s158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Massumi, Brian. 1996. The Autonomy of Affect. Cultural Critique 31: 83–110.Google Scholar
  74. Matusall, Svenja. 2012. Looking for the Social in the Brain: The Emergence of Social Neuroscience. Zürich: ETH Zürich.Google Scholar
  75. Meloni, Maurizio. 2014. How Biology became Social and What it Means for Social Theory. The Sociological Review 52 (3): 593–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Morawski, Jill G. 1988. The Rise of Experimentation in American Psychology. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  77. Myers, Natasha. 2012. Dance Your PhD: Embodied Animations, Body Experiments, and the Affective Entanglements of Life Science Research. Body & Society 18 (1): 151–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Nature (Editorial). 2012. Life Stresses. Nature 490: 143.Google Scholar
  79. The Neurocritic. 2012. How Much of the Neuroimaging Literature Should We Discard?, The Neurocritic: Deconstructing the Most Sensationalistic Recent Findings in Human Brain Imaging, Cognitive Neuroscience, and Psychopharmacology, Consulted May 2012. http://neurocritic.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/how-much-of-neuroimaging-literature.html
  80. Niewöhner, Jörg. 2011. Epigenetics: Embedded Bodies and the Molecularisation of Biography and Milieu. BioSocieties 6 (3): 279–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Nikoleyczik, Katrin. 2012. Towards Diffractive Transdisciplinarity: Integrating Gender Knowledge into the Practice of Neuroscientific Research. Neuroethics 5 (3): 231–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Nowotny, Helga. 2005. The Increase of Complexity and Its Reduction Emergent Interfaces Between the Natural Sciences, Humanities and Social Sciences. Theory, Culture & Society 22 (5): 15–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Ortega, Francisco, and Fernando Vidal. 2007. Mapping the Cerebral Subject in Contemporary Culture. RECIIS: Electronic Journal of Communication Information and Innovation in Health 1 (2): 255–259.Google Scholar
  84. Osborne, Tom, and Nikolas Rose. 2008. Populating Sociology: Carr-Saunders and the Problem of Population. The Sociological Review 56 (4): 552–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Papoulias, Constantina, and Felicity Callard. 2010. Biology’s Gift: Interrogating the Turn to Affect. Body & Society 16 (1): 29–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Pickering, Andrew. 1992. Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  87. ———. 1995. The Mangle of Practice: Time, Agency, and Science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  88. Pickersgill, Martin. 2013. The Social Life of the Brain: Neuroscience in Society. Current Sociology 61 (3): 322–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Pinker, Steven. 2013. Science is Not Your Enemy: An Impassioned Plea to Neglected Novelists, Embattled Professors, and Tenure-less Historians, The New Republic, Consulted August 2013. http://www.newrepublic.com/article/114127/science-not-enemy-humanities
  90. Poldrack, Russell A. 2010. Subtraction and Beyond: The Logic of Experimental Designs for Neuroimaging. In Foundational Issues in Human Brain Mapping, ed. S.J. Hanson and M. Bunzl, 147–160. Boston, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Rees, Dai, and Steven Rose, eds. 2004. The New Brain Sciences: Perils and Prospects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  92. Renwick, Chris. 2012. British Sociology’s Lost Biological Roots: A History of Futures Past. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Rheinberger, Hans-Jörg. 1994. Experimental Systems: Historiality, Narration, and Deconstruction. Science in Context 7 (1): 65–81.Google Scholar
  94. ———. 2010. An Epistemology of the Concrete: Twentieth-Century Histories of Life. Durham, ND: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. ———. 2011. Consistency from the Perspective of an Experimental Systems Approach to the Sciences and Their Epistemic Objects. Manuscrito 34 (1): 307–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Roepstorff, Andreas. 2001. Brains in Scanners: An Umwelt of Cognitive Neuroscience. Semiotica 134 (1): 747–765.Google Scholar
  97. Roepstorff, Andreas, and Chris D. Frith. 2012. Neuroanthropology or Simply Anthropology? Going Experimental as Method, as Object of Study, and as Research Aesthetic. Anthropological Theory 12 (1): 101–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Roepstorff, Andreas, Jörg Niewöhner, and Stefan Beck. 2010. Enculturing Brains through Patterned Practices. Neural Networks 23 (8–9): 1051–1059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Rose, Nikolas. 1991. Power and Subjectivity: Critical History and Psychology. Academy for the Study of the Psychoanalytic Arts, Consulted September 2012. http://www.academyanalyticarts.org/rose1.htm.
  100. ———. 2010. “Screen and Intervene”: Governing Risky Brains. History of the Human Sciences 23 (1): 79–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. ———. 2013. The Human Sciences in a Biological Age. Theory, Culture & Society 30 (1): 3–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Rose, Nikolas, and Joelle M. Abi-Rached. 2013. Neuro: The New Brain Sciences and the Management of the Mind. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Sambo, Chiara F., et al. 2010. Knowing You Care: Effects of Perceived Empathy and Attachment Style on Pain Perception. Pain 151 (3): 687–693.Google Scholar
  104. Von Scheve, Christian. 2012. Sociology of Neuroscience or Neurosociology? In Sociological Reflections on the Neurosciences, ed. M. Pickersgill and I. van Keulen, 255–278. (Advances in Medical Sociology: 13). London: Emerald.Google Scholar
  105. Schilbach, Leonard, et al. 2013. Toward a Second-person Neuroscience. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (4): 393–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Sedgwick, Eve K. 2003. Touching Feeling: Affect, Pedagogy, Performativity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  107. Shearmur, Jeremy. 2013. Beveridge and the Brief Life of “Social Biology” at the LSE. Agenda: A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform 20 (1), Consulted August 2013. http://epress.anu.edu.au/apps/bookworm/view/Volume+20%2C+Number+1%2C+2013/10641/shearmur.xhtml#toc_marker-12
  108. Singh, Ilina. 2012. Human Development, Nature and Nurture: Working Beyond the Divide. BioSocieties 7 (3): 308–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Slaby, Jan, and Suparna S. Choudhury. 2012. Critical Neuroscience—Between Lifeworld and Laboratory. In Critical Neuroscience: A Handbook of the Social and Cultural Contexts of Neuroscience, ed. S. Choudhury and J. Slaby, 27–51. London: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  110. Smith, Barry. 2012. Neuroscience and Philosophy Must Work Together. The Guardian, Consulted August 2013. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/mar/04/consciousness-neuroscience-self-philosophy.
  111. Stafford, Barbara M. 2008. Echo Objects: The Cognitive Work of Images. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  112. Tallis, Raymond. 2011. Aping Mankind: Neuromania, Darwinitis and the Misrepresentation of Humanity. London: Acumen.Google Scholar
  113. Thompson Klein, Julie. 2010. A Taxonomy of Interdisciplinarity. In The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity, ed. R. Frodeman, J. Thompson Klein, and C. Mitcham, 15–30. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  114. Turnbull, Neil. 2007. Attention and Automaticity Interview with Barbara Stafford. Theory, Culture & Society 24 (7–8): 342–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Vidal, Fernando. 2009. Brainhood, Anthropological Figure of Modernity. History of the Human Sciences 22 (1): 5–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Vrecko, Scott. 2010. Birth of a Brain Disease: Science, the State and Addiction Neuropolitics. History of the Human Sciences 23 (4): 52–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Whitehead, Alfred N. 1964. The Concept of Nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Wilson, Elizabeth A. 1998. Neural Geographies: Feminism and the Microstructure of Cognition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  119. ———. 2004a. Psychosomatic: Feminism and the Neurological Body. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. ———. 2004b. Gut Feminism. Differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies 15 (3): 66–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. ———. 2010. Affect and Artificial Intelligence. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
  122. ———. 2011. Neurological Entanglements: The Case of Paediatric Depressions, SSRIs and Suicidal Ideation. Subjectivity 4 (3): 277–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Young, Allan. 2012. The Social Brain and the Myth of Empathy. Science in Context 25 (03): 401–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Des Fitzgerald
    • 1
  • Felicity Callard
    • 2
  1. 1.Cardiff UniversityCardiffUK
  2. 2.Birkbeck, University of LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations