Mythbuster #23 - Left v Right Brain

The left v right neuromyth is one of the most popular. It underpins disproven teaching methods and psychometric test if applicants are the right 'fit' for a position.

How can we stop the perpetuation of these potentially harmful myths?

The Claim

The myth dates back to 1844 when Arthur Ladbroke Wigan claimed that the left and right hemispheres work independently having different personalities. This idea was popularised in Robert Louis Stevenson’s famous Jekyll & Mr. Hyde story (1886).

The claim was reinforced from studies of patients who had their corpus callosum (connects the left & right brain hemispheres) removed as a cure for epilepsy (before effective drugs were developed) who showed ?more or less unchanged behaviour.?

This led to the belief that each hemisphere (left and right) of the brain works autonomously & has a separate function.?Left brained people are more logical, verbal, cautious & generally anally retentive whereas right brained people are creative, intuitive, adventurous hippy types.?

From this all sorts of extraordinary extrapolations could be made.?For example, Brain Gym who promote ‘Whole-Brain Learning’, might argue that education focusses too much on the left side and not enough on the right and we should focus on developing both sides of the brain or candidates taking a left/right brain test (google it, they exist!) would help recruiters select the right (excuse the pun) ‘type’ of people for being creative & innovative.

The Evidence

Like other neuromyths (10% brain usage, VAK learning styles, multiple intelligences, sleep while learning, male female differences etc) there might well be a kernel of truth in this myth.

For example, the left hemisphere specialises in some verbal processes but not all.?Speech melody & ‘reading between the lines’ language components are in the right hemisphere Most regions of the brain come in pairs (we have a left and right amyglada & hippocampus which have different functions.

So, lateralization of the brain occurs at a local level for some functions but not at a whole brain level.

But...

Creative thinking, the most common context for discussions of left-and right-brained thinking, is particularly dependent on interaction of both sides, as neither one can operate in isolation from the other. In fact, connectivity, not isolation, best-characterises the operation of the normal human brain”

The Verdict

The myth is unhelpful because it assumes that say maths is about being detail orientated, analytical and rational but it takes a lot of creative thinking too?- if you are good at maths you are not just using your left hemisphere but both.?The same goes for most cognitive functions.

Like MBTI (and other spurious personality type tests) it is potentially destructive categorising people because it limits their beliefs in their ability – the opposite of what we are trying to achieve in organisational change.

The Alternative

As well as organisational change, and perhaps more worryingly, neuromyths prevail in teaching and other disciples such as marketing.?Solutions & interventions are sold based on exaggerated claims from neuroscience because using ‘neuro’ or ‘brain’ as a prefix gives the pretense of them being based on sound science which sells.

But as we discussed in our Mythbusting Organisational Change #changethoughts talk this week neuroscience studies are conducted in laboratories and miss out on the most important factor in organisational change – context.

My top tips would be:

• Treat anything with ‘neuro’ or ‘brain’ prefixes which a high degree of skepticism e.g. 'neuro' leadership, 'neuro' linguistic programming, sCARF model which claims to be a 'brain' based approach for collaborating and influencing others
• Do your own research using sources of people who are at the cutting edge of research & teaching such as Karl Friston, Lisa Feldman Barrett, Anil Seth & Robert Sapolsky (albeit the latter's view of the brain feels a litte outdated)
• Critically evaluate those sources
• Implicit reflection – reflect and challenge your own underlying assumptions e.g. are you making an extraordinary extrapolation based on a kernel of truth
• Politely refute assumptions others are making e.g., on LinkedIn, using evidence you have collated & trust – ask them what evidence underpins their assumptions
• Academics love talking about their research – invite them to contribute to debates, ask them why academic findings often contradict each other or even challenge their assumptions ;)
• Ask consultants & trainers to disclose the sources of evidence they use.?Do not use them if they perpetuate neuromyths.

What else can we do to stop the?perpetuations of neuromyths?