Does Belief in Dualism Protect against Maladaptive Psycho- Social Responses to Deep Brain Stimulation? An Empirical Exploration

We provide empirical evidence that people who believe in dualism are more likely to be uncomfortable with Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) and to view it as threatening to their identity, humanity, or self. It is (neurocentric) materialists—who think the mind just is the brain—that are less inclined to fear DBS or to see it as threatening. We suggest various possible reasons for this connection. The inspiration for this brief report is a target article that addresses this issue from a theoretical perspective. Mecacci and Haselager (M&H; this issue) offer several interesting hypotheses about the negative psycho-social side-effects of having an electronic device implanted in one’s brain via Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS), such as feeling like a different person or a machine. The authors argue that one’s beliefs about the relation between the mind and the body (e.g., dualism vs. materialism) can promote or attenuate such “psycho-social maladaptations.” One of their core hypotheses is that a belief in dualism protects against these effects, since “the stimulations will not touch one’s ‘genuine self’” if one believes “the brain is not involved in the very nature of your mind and self” (ms. p. 3). On the other hand, Mecacci and Haselager claim a belief in “neurocentric” materialism may lead one to “feel exposed to a personal disruption, for a stimulator interferes with what is responsible for the entire personal dimension, the brain” (ms. p. 3). If M&H are right, people who accept dualism should (a) be less likely to view DBS as a threat to personal identity, (b) be more comfortable with DBS in general, and (c) not see DBS as a procedure that would make people “less human.” These views, if true, are likely to hold for DBS patients as well as the general public. For example, nonDBS patients who are dualists should see DBS as less of a threat to personal identity than materialists would.