All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
June 10, 2014 - Skeptoid
17:05
Skeptoid #418: Left Brained, Right Brained, or Hare Brained?

Pop psychology tells us we're all either left brain or right brain dominant, a concept with no scientific support. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
The Myth of Left-Brained People 00:14:16
All of us have grown up being told that we're either left-brained or right-brained, based on our various aptitudes or talents.
Sometimes we're even encouraged to make life decisions, like which college degree to pursue, based on this metric.
What if it turned out that the whole idea of brain-sightedness turned out to be complete hogwash?
Well, that's what we're looking at today on Skeptoid.
A quick reminder for everyone, you're listening to Skeptoid, revealing the true science and true history behind urban legends every week since 2006.
With over a thousand episodes, we're celebrating 20 years of keeping it focused and keeping it brief.
And we couldn't have done it without your curiosity leading the way.
And now we're even offering a little bit more.
If you become a premium member, supporting the show with a monthly micropayment of as little as $5, you get more Skeptoid.
The premium version of the show is not only ad-free, it has extended content.
These episodes are a few minutes longer.
We get rid of the ads and we'll replace them with more Skeptoid.
The Extended Premium Show available now.
Come to Skeptoid.com and click Go Premium.
You're listening to Skeptoid.
I'm Brian Dunning from Skeptoid.com.
Left-brained, right-brained, or hair-brained?
Perhaps the most pervasive popular belief that people associate with neuroscience is the idea that we all tend to be either left-brained or right-brained, based on traits like creativity or analytical ability.
It's well known that certain brain functions are localized in various parts of the brain, so it would seem to make sense that some of our individual strengths of weaknesses can be quantified based on brain hemisphere dominance.
Quite a few companies even sell products intended to analyze your brain-sightedness, promising a variety of personal development benefits.
But is this belief, so widely held, good science, terrible science, or some mixture of the two?
Once in college, I took an honors colloquium class that was supposed to expose us to a wide variety of ideas and experiences.
It was taught by three professors who were presented to us as being the smartest, most well-rounded guys on campus.
One of our exercises was to take a test that was supposed to reveal our brain-sightedness.
The questions were similar to what you might get in a personality test, asking about whether you prefer math or art, privacy or crowds, planning ahead or working on the fly.
Some days later, we each received our results, a two-axis radar chart, showing a skewed diamond with its left and right corners representing the levels to which we depended on our left brain or right brain, and the top and bottom corners showing the degree to which we depended on our anterior or posterior parts of our brain.
It was explained to us that these results could be used to help us self-assess our aptitudes at various skills.
Would we be good at sales, leadership, or education?
What areas of ourselves could we work on to improve ourselves?
What kind of value could we add to an organization with our particular brain map?
Most students had crazily shaped radar charts that showed a strong dependence on one brain area or the other.
The horizontal axis had a range of 0 to 120 on both sides.
We all thought that anyone who had a chart exceeding 100 on either side must be extraordinarily talented, according to the popularly believed norms.
If you were over 100 on the left, you were a math or analytical genius.
If you were over 100 on the right, you were the next Mozart or Rembrandt.
I was very proud that mine was the only one that was symmetrical, 94 on both sides.
But after later reflection, I recalled that many of the questions had to do with the classes we were taking.
At the time, my idea was to double major in computer science and film directing, so I'd given a lot of answers that indicated I was both analytical and creative.
I hadn't had much experience in scientific skepticism at that point, but if I had, I might well have realized that the test was grossly unscientific and relied completely on self-reported answers that might have changed from one day to the next, depending on mood, terminology, context, and many other variables.
Looking at the same tests now, I realize that was only the tip of the iceberg.
Brain-sightedness, as a predictor of either preferences or aptitudes, is unscientific for a very good reason.
It's virtually entirely wrong.
Let's go back to that popular public assumption that the left brain is analytic and the right brain is creative, upon which so many of the questions in my honors colloquium test focused, and upon which the whole class based the entirety of their analyses of their test results.
The natural inference is that people whose left brains are dominant must be good at analytical skills, and people whose right brains are dominant must be good at creative skills.
The reverse would also be true.
If you're a mathematician or engineer, we might deduce that you are left-brained.
If you're an artist or poet, that you're right-brained.
Where did this idea come from?
It appears to have its original roots in the work of Dr. Roger Sperry, who worked with epileptic patients in the 1960s and 1970s.
One extreme form of treatment was to sever the corpus callosum, which is the major connection between the two brain hemispheres.
He was a co-recipient of the 1981 Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine for his split brain research, which was the seminal work that taught us that certain functions in the brain are lateralized, that is, concentrated in one hemisphere or the other.
An interesting part of the work Sperry did with one of his collaborators, Dr. Michael Gazaniga, was to find out what would happen to patients whose corpus callosums were severed.
And I've already been informed that the correct plural of that is corpora callosa, but I don't think anybody really ever says that.
In short, so long as patients had both eyes and both hands available to perform tasks, they were generally alright.
But when only one hand was allowed to feel an object, and only one eye was allowed to read a certain word, a lot of fascinating things happened.
Patients reported seeing the word if they saw it with their left eye, but not if they saw it with their right eye.
In fact, if shown the name of an object with their left eye, interpreted with their right brain, their left hand could identify and find the object.
But then when the patient was asked about it, requiring the left brain, they were unable to say what word they'd been shown and unable to explain why they were holding it.
Spoken language, it seemed, was centered in the left side of the brain, while the ability to analyze and comprehend was centered in the right.
However, pop culture psychology decided to misunderstand and exaggerate this.
Ever since then, there's been this popular notion that people with strong tendencies toward analytical or artistic pursuits must be dominant in one hemisphere or the other.
The idea can be traced back to two facts.
In a world that can feel overwhelming, spreading thoughtful, evidence-based content is one of the best ways to make a positive impact.
Ask your local public radio station to air the Skeptoid Files, a 30-minute radio-friendly version of Skeptoid that pairs two related episodes promoting real science, true history, and critical thinking.
And in these challenging times for public media, we're offering these broadcasts for free to radio stations, available on the PRX Exchange or directly from Skeptoid Media.
It's an easy ask.
Just send a quick message to your station's programming director.
By helping to bring the Skeptoid files to the airwaves, you'll help promote the essential skills we all need to tell fact from fiction.
Just go to your local station's website, find the programming director's email address, or just their general email address.
You can even use the telephone.
I know that might sound crazy.
It's an old legacy device that allows real-time voice communication.
I know that's weird, but hey, it's an option.
The world can feel chaotic, but you're not powerless.
When you promote critical thinking, you can help your community tell fact from fiction.
And that's how we shape a better future.
In uncertain times, spreading good ideas can make you feel helpful, not helpless.
Let's stand up for reason, truth, and understanding together.
Get them to air the Skeptoid files from Skeptoid Media, available on the PRX Exchange, and they'll know what that is.
The first fact is that, as Sperry and Gazanaga demonstrated, many brain functions are localized.
Just about any given function is centralized in a particular brain region.
Two of the most familiar are language, which is localized mainly in the left hemisphere, and facial recognition, more in the right hemisphere.
Today we can verify these types of observations with technologies such as fMRI, functional magnetic resonance imaging, which shows where blood flow is greatest in the brain at a given moment, a technology that was unavailable in Sperry's day.
If someone's working on a math problem, we'll see more activity in a different part of the brain than we would if they were looking at a painting.
The second fact is that people are either left-handed or right-handed.
For the most part, the left side of the body is controlled by the right side of the brain and the right side of the body is controlled by the left.
A right-handed person working a complicated task with his right hand will show more fMRI activity in his left hemisphere, and vice versa.
So it stands to reason, apparently, that a lefty will tend to be more skilled at activities that are lateralized in the right part of the brain, such as composing music.
And a righty will tend to be more skilled at things like computer programming.
This has largely given rise to the myth that left-handed people tend to be more creative, better artists, better musicians.
So what's the problem with these two facts?
Despite that they're both true, why are they not reasons that people are left-brain dominant or right-brain dominant?
Although brain functions can be lateralized, the brain as a whole is a single unit.
The corpus callosum is there for a good reason.
The brain hemispheres must be linked to work together, just as your computer's internal components must be linked by cables.
The fact that certain functions tend to be lateralized has nothing to do with any dominance of one hemisphere or the other in people with particular skills.
And although left-handed and right-handed people will tend to show differing levels of activity in their hemispheres when performing certain tasks, it's not necessarily a requirement.
An important feature of the brain is an ability we call neuroplasticity, which is its power to relocate certain functions when needed.
Sometimes brain injuries can destroy a region.
Neuroplasticity means that other parts of the brain can often relearn abilities, to varying degrees, that used to be localized in the damaged region.
A left-handed person need not necessarily become right-handed after suffering an injury in the right hemisphere.
A familiar example of neuroplasticity is the ability of stroke victims to regain functions such as speech, agility, and even symmetrical control of facial muscles after losing those abilities to the brain damaged caused by their stroke.
Notably, the majority of patients who undergo perhaps the most frighteningly named surgical procedure, the hemispherectomy, are able to live relatively normal lives, at least when the procedure is done earlier in childhood.
Older patients don't often fare as well.
Memory, personality, and aptitudes are usually unchanged after the procedure.
Manual dexterity and vision are usually heavily impaired on the side opposite the hemisphere that's removed, but that's the result of the loss of certain anatomical structures.
Studies of hemispherectomy patients have shown no correlation between which half was removed and the patient's language abilities, analytical abilities, and all other skills we tend to relate to brain-sightedness.
Neuroplasticity is the basic explanation for why personalities and aptitudes are not correlated with any sort of hemisphere dominance.
To the neurologist, it's essentially a meaningless term.
Nevertheless, you will find that any number of companies sell tests claimed to help you better understand your aptitudes and potential based on determining whether you're left-brained, right-brained, anterior-brained, posterior-brained, or just about anything else.
Companies promise to improve your business performance and help you identify areas for improvement.
One even provides a 60-page report including an eight-axis radar chart, your ranges of analysis, expressions, drive, and stability.
And the word neuroscience is peppered throughout the marketing materials and products of these companies.
Skeptoid Fights Pseudoscience 00:02:46
In fact, it's supported by no evidence at all, and no legitimate neuroscience pretends to measure these traits.
Dr. Stephen Novella summed it up aptly in his final sentence of a 2008 article in Neurologica.
The left-brain-right-brain dichotomy is pop psychology pseudoscience.
Be suspicious of anyone touting it as a legitimate or insightful way of looking at human personality or cognition.
Neuroscience is, at once, one of the most complex and nascent fields in current research.
Brains are perhaps the most complicated and nuanced structures in nature.
Send not thy money to those who claim to have it all figured out.
As a neuroscientist at the University of Arizona told me after reading a draft of this episode, brain tests such as brain-sightedness, Myers-Briggs, etc., etc., are just as science-based as the average, which Game of Thrones character are you, quiz on BuzzFeed.
I need to give big thanks to those of you who support Skeptoid financially through the tax-deductible monthly micropayments.
Skeptoid has continued as long as it has only because of you.
You have my gratitude and please introduce yourself if you run into me at a conference.
You're listening to Skeptoid.
I'm Brian Dunning from Skeptoid.com.
Hello, everyone.
This is Adrian Hill from Skookum Studios in Calgary, Canada, the land of maple syrup and mousse.
And I'm here to ask you to consider becoming a premium member of Skeptoid for as little as $5 per month.
And that's only the cost of a couple of Tim Horton's double doubles.
And that's Canadian for coffee with double cream and sugar.
Why support Skeptoid?
If you are like me and don't like ads, but like extended versions of each episode, Premium is for you.
If you want to support a worthwhile non-profit that combats pseudoscience, promotes critical thinking, and provides free access to teachers to use the podcast in the classroom via the Teacher's Toolkit, then sign up today.
Remember that skepticism is the best medicine.
Next to giggling, of course.
Until next time, this is Adrienne Hill.
From PRX
Export Selection