Corinne Kamrar fMRI 204566178 Whether or not neuroimaging, more specifically functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), informs cognitive theories is investigated through two opposing views. Max Coltheart argues, cognitive neuroimaging lacks the ability to inform cognitive theory and therefore does not contribute to the study of cognition. In other words, cognitive theory informs neuroimaging and not the other way around, such that, neuroimaging informs cognitive theory. Contradicting Coltheart’s view on cognitive neuroimaging, Mara Mather, John Cacicppo, and Nancy Kanwisher agree that an abundance of knowledge can be obtained from fMRI’s and therefore influence cognitive theories. The differing view points include counterarguments and restrictions explored through the use of reasoning and analysis. The two intentions of neuroimaging proposed by Calheart include; localizing cognitive processes in terms of anatomical regions and the opportunity to test cognitive theories through neuroimaging. The deficiency in the fMRI’s fundamental abilities is what Calheart basis his argument on. Calheart suggests that localization studies do not inform cognitive theory. His …show more content…
Mather’s paper encompasses four distinct arguments contradicting Calheart’s discussion. Contrary to Calheart who believes brain activity does not indicate cognitive operation performance, the first argument offers insight about location of brain activity and correlation with cognitive processes taking place. Mather et al. argues that the fusiform face area of the brain responds selectively to specific categories. I believe Calheart would indicate that just because brain activity takes place in the fusiform face area of the brain, it by no means indicates that no other processes within the brain are taking place—it is not an all or non