The presentation of the mind-brain problem in leading psychiatry journals.
Alexander Moreira-Almeida, Saulo de F Araujo, C Robert Cloninger
Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria February 1, 2018 DOI: 10.1590/1516-4446-2017-2342 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Systematic review Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Population | Articles on the mind-brain problem published in the three highest-impact general psychiatry journals, 1995-2015 |
| Duration | 1995 to 2015 |
| Keywords | Brain Humans Psychophysiology Consciousness Neurosciences Publications Journal impact factor |
| Key findings | Argues that the 23 reviewed articles on the mind-brain problem, though highly cited (mean 130 citations), misrepresented theoretical positions, lacked relevant contemporary literature, and showed a strong bias against dualism and toward a materialist/physicalist approach, presenting the mind-brain problem as solved without adequate discussion or evidence. |
Abstract
Objective: The mind-brain problem (MBP) has marked implications for psychiatry, but has been poorly discussed in the psychiatric literature. This paper evaluates the presentation of the MBP in the three leading general psychiatry journals during the last 20 years.
Methods: Systematic review of articles on the MBP published in the three general psychiatry journals with the highest impact factor from 1995 to 2015. The content of these articles was analyzed and discussed in the light of contemporary debates on the MBP.
Results: Twenty-three papers, usually written by prestigious authors, explicitly discussed the MBP and received many citations (mean = 130). The two main categories were critiques of dualism and defenses of physicalism (mind as a brain product). These papers revealed several misrepresentations of theoretical positions and lacked relevant contemporary literature. Without further discussion or evidence, they presented the MBP as solved, dualism as an old-fashioned or superstitious idea, and physicalism as the only rational and empirically confirmed option.
Conclusion: The MBP has not been properly presented and discussed in the three leading psychiatric journals in the last 20 years. The few articles on the topic have been highly cited, but reveal misrepresentations and lack of careful philosophical discussion, as well as a strong bias against dualism and toward a materialist/physicalist approach to psychiatry.
Citations in the library
Cited by 5
- The mind-brain problem: Ethical and clinical implications for psychiatry. International Review of Psychiatry 2025
- Exploring the mind-brain relationship to advance mental health research and practice Current Psychology December 1, 2025
- Life after death and mind beyond the brain: Reflections and implications for aging. International Psychogeriatrics March 1, 2026
- Schlussfolgerung Die Wissenschaft vom Leben nach dem Tod 2024
- Methodological Exclusion of the Transcendent? Implications for Theory and Research in Religion, Spirituality and Health. Journal of Religion and Health August 28, 2023