An academic survey on theoretical foundations, common assumptions and the current state of consciousness science
Jolien C. Francken, L. Beerendonk, D. Molenaar, Johannes Jacobus Fahrenfort, Julian Kiverstein, A. Seth, Simon van Gaal
Neuroscience of Consciousness 2022 DOI: 10.1093/nc/niac011 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Survey Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 166 |
| Population | Consciousness researchers (philosophy, neuroscience, psychology, computer science) at various career stages |
| Citations | 96 |
| Key findings | Most surveyed consciousness researchers believe machines could have consciousness, that consciousness is gradual in animals, and that unconscious processing is extensive across cognitive levels. |
Abstract
Abstract We report the results of an academic survey into the theoretical and methodological foundations, common assumptions, and the current state of the field of consciousness research. The survey consisted of 22 questions and was distributed on two different occasions of the annual meeting of the Association of the Scientific Study of Consciousness (2018 and 2019). We examined responses from 166 consciousness researchers with different backgrounds (e.g. philosophy, neuroscience, psychology, and computer science) and at various stages of their careers (e.g. junior/senior faculty and graduate/undergraduate students). The results reveal that there remains considerable discussion and debate between the surveyed researchers about the definition of consciousness and the way it should be studied. To highlight a few observations, a majority of respondents believe that machines could have consciousness, that consciousness is a gradual phenomenon in the animal kingdom, and that unconscious processing is extensive, encompassing both low-level and high-level cognitive functions. Further, we show which theories of consciousness are currently considered most promising by respondents and how supposedly different theories cluster together, which dependent measures are considered best to index the presence or absence of consciousness, and which neural measures are thought to be the most likely signatures of consciousness. These findings provide us with a snapshot of the current views of researchers in the field and may therefore help prioritize research and theoretical approaches to foster progress.
Citations in the library
Cited by 47
- An adversarial collaboration protocol for testing contrasting predictions of global neuronal workspace and integrated information theory PLoS One February 10, 2023
- Are we really unconscious in "unconscious" states? Common assumptions revisited. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 2022
- (Dis)confirming theories of consciousness and their predictions: towards a Lakatosian consciousness science Neuroscience of Consciousness 2024
- Consciousness science: where are we, where are we going, and what if we get there? Frontiers in Science October 30, 2025
- Cell consciousness: a dissenting opinion : The cellular basis of consciousness theory lacks empirical evidence for its claims that all cells have consciousness. EMBO Reports March 28, 2024
and 42 more in the library
Cites 46
- On a confusion about a function of consciousness Behavioral and Brain Sciences June 1, 1995
- An information integration theory of consciousness BMC Neuroscience November 2, 2004
- Consciousness as Integrated Information: a Provisional Manifesto Biological Bulletin December 1, 2008
- A Theoretically Based Index of Consciousness Independent of Sensory Processing and Behavior Science Translational Medicine August 14, 2013
- Theories of consciousness. Nature Reviews Neuroscience July 1, 2022
and 41 more in the library