Written Communication Apr 2017

Three Forms of Neurorealism: Explaining the Persistence of the “Uncritically Real” in Popular Neuroscience News

David R. Gruber

Abstract

Neuro-realism is a widely cited concept describing a textual phenomenon in popular science news wherein brain research uncritically validates or invalidates the “realness” of particular beliefs or practices. Currently, no research on neuro-realism examines the variable rhetorical roles of such statements, that is, how they support specialized arguments or enhance social functions across genres of public communication. This article details the nuances of neuro-realism, arguing that neuro-realism is much more than a singular textual phenomenon but a flexible rhetorical vehicle manifesting in at least three forms: commonsense, judicial, and rational. Each form serves a larger argumentative purpose, and each can be consistently linked to a popular news subgenre, illuminating how neuro-realism’s stunning lack of criticality proves permissible and reproducible in popular science publications.

Journal
Written Communication
Published
2017-04-01
DOI
10.1177/0741088317699899
Open Access
Closed
Topics
writing across the curriculum

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (1)

  1. Gibbons (2021)
    Rhetorics of the Cognitive Vernacular: Blame Amid the Opioid Crisis
    Rhetoric Society Quarterly

Cites in this index (6)

  1. Dahl (2015)
    Contested Science in the Media
    Written Communication
  2. Luzón (2013)
    Public Communication of Science in Blogs
    Written Communication
  3. Swarts (2010)
    Recycled Writing: Assembling Actor Networks From Reusable Content
    Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  4. Smagorinsky (2008)
    The Method Section as Conceptual Epicenter in Constructing Social Science Resea…
    Written Communication
  5. FAHNESTOCK (1998)
    Accommodating Science
    Written Communication
Show all 6 →
  1. FAHNESTOCK (1986)
    Accommodating Science
    Written Communication
Also cites 63 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.1016/j.cell.2014.07.051
     ↗
  2. 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00357
     ↗
  3. 10.1177/0963662514556144
     ↗
  4. 10.1521/soco.2014.32.supp.209
     ↗
  5. 10.1037/0022-3514.81.6.1014
     ↗
  6. 10.1177/1745691610388779
     ↗
  7. 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01550.x
     ↗
  8. 10.1073/pnas.1112029108
     ↗
  9. 10.1177/0957926504043705
     ↗
  10. 10.1080/21507741003699355
     ↗
  11. 10.1038/nrg2201
     ↗
  12. 10.1177/0963662516629745
     ↗
  13. 10.1080/17405900902749965
     ↗
  14. 10.1177/1745691612469035
     ↗
  15. 10.1016/j.pscychresns.2006.11.001
     ↗
  16. 10.1080/00028533.2007.11821673
     ↗
  17. 10.1215/9780822376767
     ↗
  18. 10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.504
     ↗
  19. 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.13018
     ↗
  20. 10.1007/s11948-012-9391-6
     ↗
  21. 10.1177/0963662512454072
     ↗
  22. 10.1088/0963-6625/3/2/001
     ↗
  23. 10.1177/0963662516636303
     ↗
  24. 10.1177/0163443713501931
     ↗
  25. Hauskin L. (2015)
    10.1162/LEON_a_00899
    Leonardo: Journal of the International Society for the Arts  ↗
  26. 10.1162/jocn_a_00407
     ↗
  27. 10.1080/01292986.2013.835328
     ↗
  28. 10.1017/CBO9780511563737
     ↗
  29. 10.4324/9780203720127
     ↗
  30. 10.1111/j.1523-536X.2009.00359.x
     ↗
  31. 10.1016/j.yebeh.2014.05.027
     ↗
  32. 10.2307/2529310
     ↗
  33. 10.1093/oso/9780199256044.001.0001
     ↗
  34. 10.3998/mpub.4585194
     ↗
  35. 10.1080/1461670X.2014.950474
     ↗
  36. 10.1080/15265160903095982
     ↗
  37. 10.1093/pan/mpr047
     ↗
  38. 10.1080/00335638409383686
     ↗
  39. 10.1177/1745691610388774
     ↗
  40. 10.3109/a036859
     ↗
  41. 10.1177/0963662516637321
     ↗
  42. 10.1037/0022-3514.77.1.167
     ↗
  43. 10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175
     ↗
  44. 10.1177/0963662513476812
     ↗
  45. 10.1177/1098214013503700
     ↗
  46. 10.1177/0011392113476464
     ↗
  47. 10.1177/0963662514521550
     ↗
  48. 10.7551/mitpress/8027.001.0001
     ↗
  49. 10.1038/nrn1609
     ↗
  50. 10.1177/1075547006291990
     ↗
  51. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199570706.013.0049
     ↗
  52. 10.1037/a0036844
     ↗
  53. Schultz W. (2015). Neuroessentialism: Theoretical and clinical considerations. Journal of Humanistic Psycholo…
     ↗
  54. 10.1186/2046-4053-2-19
     ↗
  55. 10.1007/s11948-012-9351-1
     ↗
  56. 10.7551/mitpress/9780262015967.001.0001
     ↗
  57. 10.1371/journal.pone.0104780
     ↗
  58. 10.4324/9780203981962
     ↗
  59. 10.1162/jocn.2008.20040
     ↗
  60. 10.1177/0263276405057192
     ↗
  61. 10.1086/214128
     ↗
  62. 10.1152/advan.00146.2013
     ↗
  63. 10.1093/scan/nst041
     ↗
CrossRef global citation count: 11 View in citation network →

Related Articles

  1. Written Communication Mar 2026
    Faculty and Administrator Perceptions of Interdisciplinary Collaborative Writing: Practices, Challenges, and Support Structures ↗
    Stephen Carradini; Ed Nagelhout
    writing across the curriculum
  2. Written Communication Jan 2026
    Parallel Surveys of GenAI and Writing: Students’ Perspectives and Instructors’ Perception of Student Perspectives in Writing-Intensive Courses ↗
    Hooman Saeli; Jeff Ringer; Chris Mayer; Matt Bryant Cheney; Grace Duncan
    writing across the curriculum
  3. Composition Forum Oct 2025
    Adding to the Qualitative Research Method Toolkit: Eliciting and Coding Participant Drawings ↗
    writing across the curriculum empirical research qualitative research multimodality multilingual writers
  4. Written Communication Oct 2025
    Gateways to a Different World of Meaning: Expanding Theme Use in Primary-Aged Children’s Writing ↗
    Frances Bodger
    writing across the curriculum multimodality multilingual writers
  5. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication Oct 2025
    One Size Does Not Fit All: How Clinical Pain Assessment Scales and Tools Mask Crip Narratives of Chronicity ↗
    Adrianna Deptula
    writing across the curriculum qualitative research multimodality