Mind myth 5: Brain profiling

This continues the series on mind myths especially applicable to education and training. The fifth mind myth relates to so-called brain profiles that have very little bearing on the brain, except in the very general sense that we all have brains and that all our behaviours are mediated by our brains. Brain profiles are favourite instruments for a variety of practitioners, many of whom use them as bait to involve gullible clients into pseudoscientific self-improvement schemes and quack therapies. They are widely used in schools and in the corporate sector.

My two previous posts on brain profiles described the pseudoscience concepts in more detail and can be found at Brain profiling - science or pseudoscience? and "Genetic" brain profiling in rugby. I described a brain profile as follows:

"A brain profile assessment is not as one may imagine a neurological or neuropsychological examination of brain function. As envisaged here, it is a questionnaire of thinking and behavioural preferences, putatively representing underlying differences in brain organisation. The questionnaire is sometimes combined with simple tests of motor and sensory dominance (hand, foot, eye, ear) (Brain Gym calls this a dominance profile)."

Brain profiles of this kind all involve some version of the left brain right brain mind myth, sometimes combined with the downshifts and blockages mind myth. Brain profilists essentially pretend to test the brain as pop-psychologists 40 years ago thought Roger Sperry thought it was organised, but did'nt. Ned Herrmann admitted that this view could only be a metaphor, but his later followers were careful to downplay that - such a view not being good for business. People who undergo brain profile tests after all, expect to learn something about their brains, not about the profilists' inaccurate metaphors for the brain.

A typical pseudoscience brain profile test comprises a number of simple questions about thinking or behavioural preferences and lasts about 30 minutes. Brain profiling instruments mostly seem to be derived from either Ned Herrmann's HBDI or a shorter "test" by Paul Torrance, the "Your Style of Learning and Thinking" (SOLAT).

While pseudoscience brain profiles have little value in my opinion, many find them amusing, even useful. Should amusement be your motivation to do a brain profile, there's a number of free brain profiles that can be done online. Do one for amusement value. Just don't get carried away and start referring to yourself as left brained or right brained, revealing yourself in the process to be no-brained. Here are some links for free online brain profiles, Brainworks; Hemispheric Dominance Test. Be reminded, however, that free tests are often bait to involve you in other activities you have to pay for.

Some people who have done brain profiles, quite seriously declare them accurate and useful. I believe that a number of cognitive effects, biases and logical fallacies play a role here.

Firstly a combination of gullibility and the power of suggestion. Gullible clients buy into the pretence of neuroscience and the suggestions offered to them by the profilists. It comes as no surprise that some brain profilists are good motivational speakers.

Secondly, the Forer effect. According to the Skeptic's Dictionary, the Forer effect "... refers to the tendency of people to rate sets of statements as highly accurate for them personally even though the statements could apply to many people." This could also be more specific, i.e. an engineer would see himself as ordered and logical, answer the brain profile questions (which tend to be quite transparent) accordingly, be classified in a left brain quadrant, the description of which he will find accurate. It's circular reasoning and also a Forer effect. Confirmation bias could also play a role, with people just ignoring results that do not fit their preconceptions.

Thirdly, cold reading may play a role. Cold reading is a style of telling someone something about themself that seems more accurate than it actually is by using ambiguous generalities. Dr. Terry Sandbek, in discussing brain typing (similar to brain profiles), indicated how cold reading could be at work in these type of instruments by " ... (giving) enough positive, but ambiguous, information for (them) to be influenced by the Forer Effect."

Blogger Sean Carmody at Stubborn Mule connected the dots and pointed out the similarities between brain profiling and astrology. Hat tip to him for this amusing image of a brain profiles encircled by astrology symbols.

While brain profiles may be of amusement value to adults, I believe that they are potentially harmful applied to children. It should be remembered that brain profiles are often just the bait for pseudoscientific therapy programmes. Parents of children who require evidence supported therapies, may be duped into enrolling their children into quack therapies, wasting valuable time and resources in the process. These children could also fall prey to the pseudoscientific beliefs or belief systems underlying these therapies - consider this statement by Sense about Science about children involved in Brain Gym: "These exercises are being taught with pseudoscientific explanations that undermine science teaching and mislead children about how their bodies work."

Another danger for children concerns Gattaca-esque notions that sometimes form part of brain profiling. Consider Naas Botha, an ex Springbok rugby player turned sports commentator, gushing here about "genetic" brain profiles for children in sport:

"It’s very, very scary. It’s also very exciting. I can see a future where we will establish at the age of five or six exactly who has the brain profile to make it to the top and in what position. The potential is absolutely amazing. ...I had my whole family brain-profiled and was amazed... "

Scary indeed. Gattaca-esque selections are scary enough when based on science, based on pseudoscience they're downright frightening. Consider the plight of a child of an overambitious parent, selected at an early age and programmed for "greatness". Consider also the child not selected or excluded for a team or a sport due to not having the "right" brain profile. As a parent I have no problem if my child is not selected for a sports team for valid reasons. I would have a major problem, however, should he or she not be selected because of not having the right brain profile. In today's high stakes sports environment, I would not be surprised if litigation followed the exclusion of competitors based on this kind of pseudoscience practice.

Keep in mind that not all brain profiles are pseudoscientific. Neuroscientists sometimes refer to large datasets of information about patients' brains as brain profiles. Here is one example (contrast these scientific neuropsychological assessments of more than eight hours duration, typically done in at least two sittings, with pseudoscientific brain profiles described above):

"The Brain Profiling Group (BPG) specializes in the testing and evaluation of brain function, for the purpose of detecting and quantifying abnormalities arising from psychological disorders or physical trauma. BPG provides this specialist service for professionals, medical and legal practitioners and patients seeking clarification of psychological and organic trauma, and others who seek to obtain peak brain performance."

In closing, spare a thought for brain profiling consultants who "innocently" became involved with this pseudoscience practice. Many of these are teachers or ex-teachers. Yes, they should have known better, but neuroscience, critical thinking and evidence supported practice have never featured strongly in teacher training. I can't be as charitable to the originators of these practices.

Other mind myths in this series were:

The 10% myth

The left brain right brain myth

Energy and the brain myth

The downshifts and blockages myth