ABSTRACT
References ............................................................................................................ 282
In general, cultural neuroscience (CN) could be understood as a paradigm that put forward the framework of culture to understand the influence of culture’s elements such as values, practices, and beliefs regarding human thought. Uniquely, the construction of a CN framework relies on theories from various disciplines such as anthropology, psychology, and genetics. In a recent study, CN was framed in multiple time scales (situation, ontogeny, and phylogeny) in order to explain how the diversity of the cultural values and genetic factors contour the complexity of the human mind and behavior [1]. Similar to the previous contribution in CN Ref. [2] states that cultural capacities and their transmission that arose from complex human mental and neurobiological processes were critically determined from bidirectional indicators (culture and gene) across two timescales: macro and micro timescales. As an example, the macro timescale determines phylogeny and lifespan, whereas the micro timescale determines the situation. In this regard [3], “culture” is viewed as a set of traits that is inflexible and has specificities. In other words, the variation of population culture can manifest in neural activation patterns. In Ref. [4], the specific importance of culture for the brain is highlighted as a fundamental value in the development of racial identity and ideology.
