Can cognitive neuroscience solve the lab-dilemma by going wild?

Abstract

Reproducibility, measurability, and refutability are the foundation of the scientific method applied to empirical work. In the study of animal and human behavior, experimental protocols conducted in the lab are the most reliable means by which scientists can operationalize behaviors using controlled and parameterized setups. However, whether observations in the lab fully generalize in the real world remain legitimately disputed. The notion of "experimental design" was originally intended to ensure the generalizability of experimental findings to real-world situations. Experiments in the wild are more frequently explored and significant technological advances have been made allowing mobile neuroimaging. Yet some methodological limitations remain when testing scientific hypotheses in ecological conditions. Herein, we discuss the limitations of inferential processes derive from empirical observations in the wild. The multi-causal property of an ecological situation often lacks controls, and this major concern may prevent the replication and the reliability of behavioral observations. We discuss the epistemological and historical grounds of the induction process for behavioral and cognitive neurosciences and provide some possible heuristics for In situ experimental designs compatible with psychophysics in the wild.

Keywords: Behavioral sciences; Ecological neurosciences; Experimental design; In situ design; methods.