Technological innovations in neuroscience have opened new windows to the understanding of brain function and the neuronal underpinnings of brain activity in neuropsychiatric disorders and social behavior. Public interest and support for neuroscience research through initiatives like the Decade of the Brain project and increasingly diverse brain-related initiatives have created new interfaces between neuroscience and society. Against this backdrop of dynamic innovation, we set out to examine how different features of neuroscience are depicted in print media. We used the ‘guided news’ function of the LexisNexis Academic database with keyword searches to find news articles published between 1995 and 2004 in major U.S. and U.K. English-language news sources. We performed searches on headlines, lead paragraphs, and body terms to maximize search yields. All articles were coded for overall tone of coverage, details on reported studies, presence of ethical, legal, and social discussion as well as the emerging interpretations of neuroscience – in the form of neuro-essentialism, neuro-realism, and neuro-policy. We found that print media coverage of the use of neurotechnology for diagnosis or therapy in neuropsychiatric disorders was generally optimistic. We also found that, even within articles that were identified as research reports, many did not provide details about research studies. We also gained additional insights into the previously identified phenomena of neuro-essentialism, neuro-realism, and neuro-policy showing some profound impacts of neuroscience on personal identity and policy-making. Our results highlight the implications of transfer of neuroscience knowledge to society given the substantial and authoritative weight ascribed to neuroscience knowledge in defining who we are. We also discuss the impact of these findings on neuroscience and on the respective contributions of the social sciences and the biological sciences in contemporary psychiatry and mental health policy.

Success in functional neuroimaging has brought the promise of quantitative data in the form of brain images to the diagnosis of disorders of the central nervous system for which only qualitative clinical criteria have previously existed. Even though the translation of research to clinical neuroimaging for conditions such as major depression may not be available yet, rapid innovation along this trajectory of discovery to implementation compels exploration of how such information will eventually affect providers and patients. Clinical neuroethics is devoted to elucidating ethical challenges prior to and during the transfer of new research capabilities to the bedside. Through a model of proactive ethics, clinical neuroethics promotes the development of responsible social and public policies in response to new diagnostic and prognostic capabilities for the benefit of patients and their families, and for providers within the health care systems in which they practice. To examine views about the potential interaction of clinical neuroimaging and depression, we surveyed both mental health providers and outpatients and inpatients diagnosed with major depressive disorder. From responses of 52 providers and 72 patients, we found high receptivity to brain scans for treatment tailoring and choice, for improving understanding of and coping with disease, and for mitigating the effects of stigma and self-blame. Our results suggest that, once ready, roll out of the fully validated technology has significant potential to reduce social burden associated with highly stigmatized illnesses like depression.