 may be the seat of self-consciousness in the brain.)
The pregenual anterior cingulate cortex (purple) may be the seat of self-consciousness in the brain.
Image: COURTESY OF W. IRWIN, University of California, San Francisco
Feeling embarrassed? You can probably thank your pregenual anterior cingulate cortex (pACC), a boomerang-shaped region of the brain nestled behind the eyes. Cognitive scientists at the University of California, San Francisco, and U.C. Berkeley probed the neuroanatomy of embarrassment by asking healthy people and those with neurodegenerative diseases to sing along to the Temptations’ “My Girl.” Horns blared, strings flowed and the subject’s voice soared—and then the music and professional vocals were stripped away. The subjects had to watch a video of their own solitary singing while researchers measured their racing hearts, sweaty palms, squirms and grimaces. Those with damage in the right pACC were least likely to cringe at their own performance.
The study, presented in April at the American Academy of Neurology conference in Hawaii, adds further evidence that this brain region has a role in many emotions, says U.C.S.F. postdoctoral fellow Virginia Sturm. Among them are the self-conscious emotions, including embarrassment, pride and guilt, which are felt in the context of others’ imagined reactions. Embarrassment, Sturm says, may have evolved to motivate us to repair social bonds that become strained when we fall short of expectations.
This article was originally published with the title How Embarrassing.
Rights & Permissions
See what we're tweeting about
8 Comments
Add CommentNOOOOO!!! Say it ain't so (sigh). More evidence that not only "self conscious" emotions are seated or instantiated by our physical brains... but in all probability, consciousness emerges from this rather intricately evolved neural network... no mystical or supernatural entities need apply.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHeck... what's a soul-based, faith-based "believer" to do? No ghost in the machine? No eternal life... no heaven r' hell... demons... angels... god(s)... just us chickens???
Sir Francis Crick was indeed correct in his "Astonishing Hypothesis" at the time: brains = minds and there is a neuroanatomical basis that explains the function, just like our the rest of our remarkable physiology. Celebrate it... cuz' it's reality.
The link to this article did not indicate it wasn't going to include the full article. How deceitful of SciAm (in addition to the deceptive title).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThey're not going to find the soul in the brain, in any case.
Why are people always so amazed when someone reports that a product of the brain is found to be produced by some part of the brain?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEverything we think, feel, etc is a product of our brains. So everything we think, feel, etc. will sooner or later be found to be produced by some part or parts of the brain.
DUH!
The soul is not real. I.e., it is not part of physical reality. Therefore it will not be found in the brain or in any other part of physical reality.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is when I find Dr. Daniel Siegel's research and perspective valuable.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"The mind uses the brain to create itself."
Feel free to substitute mind for soul, essence, spirit,...
The brain MRI research is great but I am very annoyed by grandeous statements like the title of this article.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm curious to know how you know this. Experiment? Observation? How to you know what "soul" would look like? How can it be observed? I'm pretty sure that science doesn't claim to know everything, and so just because something is outside of "scientific knowledge" is not proof of existence or non-existence.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisScientists continue to find evidence in support of the idea that our brains encompass the totality of our experience, through observation and experimentation. No one has yet devised a comprehensible or testable theory of the soul. The soul appears to have been a place holder for facts unavailable to us in the past and there is no good reason to hypothesize a consciousness separate from, and yet integral to our physical conscious existence. The burden of proof for supernatural claims lies with the claimant. It is not the job of science to discredit loosely defined and unprovable hypotheses. No, science doesn't know everything. What is your point?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this