The study was quite successful in exploring a very interesting point about the relation between brain activity levels and motherly emotion. It adopted a carefully studied methodology which was able to generate good results. However, the study could have yielded varied and more interesting results if it added some components to its structure. First, the study could have used a more diverse sample to represent different have scenarios.
Instead of just using a fairly uniform sample (i. e. middle-aged mothers with young children), the study should include younger mothers with kids of the same age range (i. e . 9 months to 6 years). This is to prove if mothers with smaller age gap with their children or those that have just given birth react more emotionally or have more intense feelings and, consequently, brain activity levels than middle-aged mothers. Middle-aged mothers, who are most likely not first time parents, may have less emotional reaction because they are used to having kids and being with them for years.
In addition, the study could have looked at older mother whose kids are either in teenage years or are already married and are most likely living independently of them. This is to find out whether mothers who are used to not having their kids at home with them get excited and emotional or are less reactive when images of their kids are shown to them. Another possibility is to get mothers from different countries (or continents) to see if cultural differences also play a part in how they react to emotional triggers. The study could have even extended to mothers with grandchildren already.
It would be interesting to see if mothers whose kids are parents themselves tend to be more emotionally engaged than mothers with younger kids. The study can also prove whether the feelings and brain activity levels are stronger when presented with images of their kids or of their grandchildren. Second, the observation period should have been extended to a week or so to determine the trend in emotional and neural response – whether they are dwindling or getting stronger over time, or fluctuating depending on the mother’s emotional state.
Finally, the study could have been more effective and useful to more people if it simplified the explanation and used less technical jargons. It could have translated the results using everyday language and related them to familiar scenarios. Though the study is highly technical in nature, the objectives, methodology and most importantly, the results can be presented in an easy-to-understand format. (Student’s name) (Professor’s name) (Subject) (Date) Just Because You’re Imaging the Brain Doesn’t Mean You Can Stop Using Your Head: A Primer and Set of First Principles
The research conducted was able to present a number of facts and explanations to support its thesis statement, which is actually the very title of the paper. However, it would have been more effective if it used illustrations, pictures and samples of brain images to prove its point. For instance, in discussing Principle 4: The Beauty of a Brain Image Does Not Speak to the Psychological Significance of the Image, the paper could have included historical samples of less sophisticated brain imaging equipment as opposed to more advanced ones.
It could have been better to show via pictures when a simpler brain image would be better in establishing a case. Similarly, pictures illustrating the evolution of brain imaging techniques could have more strongly driven the point on advances made in the fields of neuroscience and cognitive science than merely stating the facts. Also, the study could have focused not only the differences between brain imaging equipment then and now, but also on the manner by which brain images are used and analyzed to diagnose a patient, for example.
More case studies like those presented in discussing Principle 1: (We Know Already That) Social Cognition, Emotion, and Behavior Involve the Brain would have been helpful in explaining the key points related to Principle 2: The Functional Localization of Component Social Processes or Representations Is Not a Search for “Centers” and Principle 3: Localized Changes in Brain Activation That Differ as a Function of a Task Do Not, In Themselves, Signal a Neural Substrate.