Addressing racial and phenotypic bias in human neuroscience methods

Despite their premise of objectivity, neuroscience tools for physiological data collection, such as electroencephalography and functional near-infrared spectroscopy, introduce racial bias into studies by excluding individuals on the basis of phenotypic differences in hair type and skin pigmentation. Furthermore, at least one methodology-electrodermal activity recording (skin conductance responses)-may be influenced not only by potential phenotypic differences but also by negative psychological effects stemming from the lived experience of racism. Here we situate these issues within structural injustice, urge researchers to challenge racism in their scientific work and propose procedures and changes that may lead to more equitable science. Human neuroscience methods (for example, electroencephalography, functional near-infrared spectroscopy and electrodermal response) are biased to exclude data from dark skin and coarse hair-traits common in Black people-and possibly people with racial trauma. We outline strategies to prevent a biased 'unusable data crisis'.

Automated summary

Neuroscience tools for physiological data collection introduce racial bias by excluding individuals based on phenotypic differences. We urge researchers to challenge racism in their scientific work and propose procedures to prevent biased data.