NEUROSCIENCE: INTERDISCIPLINARY INTEGRATION OR EXPANSION?

Shibkova D.; Baiguzhin P.

doi:10.14529/jpps200312

D. Z. Shibkova South Ural State University, Chelyabinsk, Russian Federation https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8583-6821 shibkova2006@mail.ru
P. A. Baiguzhin South Ural State University, Chelyabinsk, Russian Federation https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5092-0943 baiguzhinpa@cusu.ru

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14529/jpps200312

Keywords: neuroscience, interdisciplinarity, expansion, system level, psychophysiology, integration, model, discussion

Abstract

Aim. The paper aims to study the differentiation and integration of scientific disciplines in the natural sciences and humanities research areas of neuroscience based on a review of Russian scientific works and to propose a structural and functional model of neuroscience as an interdisciplinary system of knowledge about brain features that ensure human activity in various professional spheres. Methods. A theoretical analysis of scientific publications on the topic over the last ten years has been used along with such methods as comparison, generalization, and modelling. Results. The paper presents various points of view on the subject field of separate disciplines within neuroscience, as well as on the relations between them. The interdisciplinarity of neuroscience is considered by a number of authors (philosophers) as a form of disciplinary colonization, epistemic expansion or intervention. Another group of authors considers neuroscience as a systemic level of science that unites multidisciplinary research activities related to the study of the brain. The third position is represented by authors who consider neuroscience as an extension of the problem field of neurobiology or as its synonym. A number of authors pay special attention to the popularity of neuroscience among politicians, military structures, pharmacological companies and other professionals with their disciplinary totality: neurophilosophy, neuropsychology, neuroinformatics, neurogenetics, neurobiology, neurosociology, neuropedagogy, etc. The paper demonstrates that there is no unified point of view on psychophysiology as a part of neuroscience, which also has interdisciplinary connections with many sciences that study individual psychological characteristics and behavior. Conclusion. Based on the analysis of the discussion, the authors emphasize the need to logically build the structural and functional relationships of individual disciplines within a unified neuroscience and determine its subject field on the basis of a systemic evolutionary approach.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

D. Z. Shibkova , South Ural State University, Chelyabinsk, Russian Federation

Doctor of biological Sciences, Professor, chief researcher of the sports science research center; Institute of sports, tourism and service

P. A. Baiguzhin , South Ural State University, Chelyabinsk, Russian Federation

Doctor of biological Sciences, leading researcher at the sports science research center; Institute of sports, tourism and service

References

1. Ababkova M.Yu., Leontieva V.L. [Neuroeducation within the frame of neuroscience: opportunities and technologies]. Zdorove – osnova chelovecheskogo potentsiala: problemy i puti ikh resheniya [Health is the basis of human potential: problems and ways of their solution], 2018, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 451–459. (in Russ.).
2. Arakelov G.G. [The future of russian psychology in the integration and development of neuroscience]. Natsionalny psikhologichesky zhurnal [National Psychological Journal], 2012, no. 2 (8), pp. 64–70. (in Russ.).
3. Bazhanov V.A., Shkurko Yu.S. [Modern neuroscience and education: new arguments in favor of old techniques]. Pedagogika [Pedagogy], 2018, no. 8, pp. 29–37. (in Russ.).
4. Baiguzhin P.A., Shibkova D.Z., Aizman R.I. [Factors affecting psychophysiological processes of information perception within the context of education informatization]. Science for Education Today [Science for Education Today], 2019, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 48–70. (in Russ.). DOI: 10.15293/2658-6762.1905.04
5. Baiguzhin P.A., Kirsanov V.M., Shibkova D.Z. [Characteristics of the functional state of the nervous system of students depending on the level of educational and professional activities regulations]. Vestnik Novosibirskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta [Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin], 2017. vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 223–240. (in Russ.). DOI: 10.15293/2226-3365.1703.14
6. Berebin M.A., Pashkov A.A. Neurobiological, Neurocomputational and Neuroimaging Aspects of Stress and Posttraumatic Stress Disorders Studies (Review). Bulletin of the South Ural State University. Ser. Psychology [Bulletin of the South Ural State University. Ser. Psychology], 2017, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 106–120. (in Russ.). DOI: 10.14529/psy170111
7. Vakhshtein V.S. [Epistemic interventions. 7 facts about “military actions” between disciplines]. Post-nauka [Post-science], 2014. Access mode: URL: https://postnauka.ru/faq/27198 (accessed 19.12.2019). (in Russ.).
8. Davydov A.A. [History and current state of integrative approach in neuroscience]. Nauchnaya diskussiya: innovatsii v sovremennom mire [Scientific discussion: innovations in the modern world], 2016, no. 7 (50), pp. 221–224. (in Russ.).
9. Davydov V.V. [Actual aspects of the mind-body problem in the situation of interaction of analytic philosophy and cognitive neurobiology]. Vestnik KRAUNTs. Gumanitarnye nauki [Bulletin KRAUNZ. Humanitarian sciences], 2006, no. 2 (8), pp. 102–119. (in Russ.).
10. Konareva I.N. [Psychophysiological paradigm learning integrity of the individual: integrative approach]. Uchenye zapiski Krymskogo federalnogo universiteta imeni V.I. Vernadskogo. Biologiya. Khimiya [Scientific Notes of V.I. Vernadsky Crimean Federal University. Biology. Chemistry], 2017, vol. 3 (69), no. 3, pp. 44–56. (in Russ.).
11. Litvinova N.A., Kazin E.M., Ivanov V.I. [The role of psychophysiological indicators in the success of adaptation of high school students to specialized training]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Bulletin of Tomsk state University], 2006, no. S21, pp. 56–57. (in Russ.).
12. Lomova O.S., Lomova Ya.Yu. [Use of advanced technologies of visualization of brain structures in neurosurgical practice]. Sistemnaya integratsiya v zdravookhranenii. Elektronnyi nauchnyi zhurnal [System Integration in Health Care: Electronic Scientific Journal], 2017, no. 5 (35), pp. 26–30. Режим доступа: URL: https://sys-int.ru/sites/default/files/sys-int-35-26-30.pdf (accessed 12.01.2020) (in Russ.).
13. Studenikin V.M., Kurbaytayeva E.M., Balkanskaya S.V., Borovik T.E. [Neurodietology: concept and basic concepts (part 1)]. Spravochnik pediatra [Handbook of Pediatrics], 2007, no. 3, pp. 41–58. (in Russ.).
14. Kostromina S.N., Bordovskaya N.V., Iskra N.N. et al. [Neuroscience, psychology and education: problems and prospects for interdisciplinary studies]. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal [Psychological journal], 2015, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 61–70. (in Russ.).
15. Apanel E.N., Golovko V.A., Evstigneev V.V. et al. [Neuroscience: achievements and prospects] Zdravookhranenie [health Care], 2012, no 11, pp. 60–65. (in Russ.).
16. Orlov D.V. [Integration process and separate aspects of the impact of neuroscience upon the development and formation of the modern criminal law]. Pravo i politika [Law and Politics], 2017, no 2, pp. 60–66. URL: https://nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=10934 (Accessed 12.01.2020) (in Russ.). DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2017.2.10934.
17. Rodionov A.R. [On the prospects for the development of human brain research in the European scientific space. Horizon 2020]. Vestnik psikhofiziologii [Bulletin of psychophysiology], 2013, no. 3, pp. 8–12. (in Russ.).
18. Stanek Yu. [The intersection of law and neuroscience]. Pravovedenie [Proceedings of Higher Educational Institutions. Pravovedenie], 2017, no. 4 (333), pp. 20–37. (in Russ.).
19. Sudakov K.V. [V.M. Bekhterev: modern neurosciences and systemic organization of cerebral functions]. Nevrologicheskii vestnik [Neurology Bulletin], 2007, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 5–11. (in Russ.).
20. Filatova A.A. [“Brainstorm”: the neuroscience outside of neuroscience]. Filosofiya nauki [Philosophy of science], 2017, no. 3 (74), pp. 106–121. DOI: 10.15372/PS20170308. (in Russ.).
21. Chernorizov A.M. [Psychophysiological scientific school by E.N. Sokolov]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 14. Psikhologiya [Moscow University Psychology Bulletin], 2010, no. 4, pp. 4–21. (in Russ.).
22. Chernorizov A.M. [“The problem field” of modern psychophysiology: from nanoneuronics to consciousness]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 14. Psikhologiya [Moscow University Psychology Bulletin], 2007, no. 3, pp. 15–43. (in Russ.).
23. Shibkova D.Z., Makunina O.A., Yakubovskaya I.A. [Psychophysiological features of students of 14-17 years]. Vestnik ChGPU [Bulletin of CSPU], 2008, no. 9, pp. 258–267. (in Russ.).
24. Shkurko Yu. [Neurotechnologies and Proliferation of the Ideas of Neuroscience]. Sotsialnaya psikhologiya i obshchestvo [Social Psychology and Society], 2017а, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 32–42. (in Russ.). DOI: 10.17759/sps.2017080403.
25. Shkurko Yu. [Incorporation of the ideas of neuroscience into sociology: how to overcome the gap between “biological” and “social”?]. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsialnoi antropologii [The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology], 2017 b, vol. 20(2), pp. 22–39 . (in Russ.).
26. Shulgina G.I. [Chaos and order in work of the nervous system]. Biomeditsinskaya radioelektronika [Journal Biomedical Radioelectronics], 2019, no. 1, pp. 31–38. (in Russ.). DOI: 10.18127/j15604136-201901-04
27. Erlikh V.V., Shibkova D.Z., Baiguzhin P.A. [Digitalization of Operational Diagnostics of Functional Reserves and Assessment of Athletic Fitness]. Chelovek. Sport. Meditsina [Human. Sport. Medicine], 2020, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 52–66. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.14529/hsm200107

References on translit

-