In Sharon Begley's WSJ article today "While Brain Imaging Offers New Knowledge, It Can Be an Illusion" she highlights important points about advancing neuroimaging. (subscription required)

On the ethics front she reiterates what Stanford's Judy Illes has been talking about for years. "Brain scans such as these have a power to persuade that other forms of data lack. Although measurements (perspiration, basically) had already shown that seeing cocaine triggers an intense physiological reaction, and although grandmasters can tell you they memorize old game positions and strategies, in both cases the brain scans carried the day."

She continues, "Blame it on the cognitive paparazzi. Neuroimaging such as PET and fMRI are seducing laypeople and scientists alike into believing we know more than we do about how and why we think, feel and behave, some scientists say. The power of brain imaging, says Frank Keil, a Yale University psychology professor, reflects "the illusion of explanatory depth. If people see something, they are often deluded into thinking they understand it better than they really do."

She ends with this reality check, "For all its flaws, neuroimaging is here to stay. No self-respecting psych department can afford to forgo it. Of the dozen or so new faculty members recently hired by his department, says Phillip Shaver, chairman of psychology at the University of California, Davis, 10 use primarily neuroimaging. Economists, political scientists and sociologists are not far behind. As with all powerful tools, let the user beware." (my emphasis added)

Beyond what she mentions here, we also see use of neuroimaging in finance, marketing, art, and even love (follow that link). So say good bye to the information society, and say hello to our emerging neurosociety. One last point, I have to hand it to Sharon for nailing the brilliant phrase "cognitive paparazzi." That's a meme that is sure to spread.