A recent opinion article suggested that the target article, “The holobiont mind: A bridge between 4E cognition and the microbiome”, wished to generate a “new theory of mind”. Furthermore, it contained ideas that were “unnecessary”, “not justified”, and “not innovative at all”. Furthermore the commentators consider that “the ideas of radical enactivism can properly accommodate this research”. Here, we address and clarify apprehensions, misreadings, and misunderstandings raised by the commentators.
BordensteinS. R.TheisK. R. (2015). Host biology in light of the microbiome: Ten principles of holobionts and hologenomes. PLoS Biology, 13(8), e1002226. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002226.
CraverC. F. (2007). Explaining the brain: Mechanisms and the mosaic unity of neuroscience. Clarendon Press.
5.
CzeszumskiA.EustergerlingS.LangA.MenrathD.GerstenbergerM.SchuberthS.SchreiberF.RendonZ. Z.KönigP. (2020). Hyperscanning: A valid method to study neural inter-brain underpinnings of social interaction. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 14, 39. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2020.00039.
6.
DjebbaraZ.FichL. B.PetriniL.GramannK. (2019). Sensorimotor brain dynamics reflect architectural affordances. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(29), 14769–14778. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1900648116.
7.
DumasG.NadelJ.SoussignanR.MartinerieJ.GarneroL. (2010). Inter-brain synchronization during social interaction. PLoS ONE, 5(8), e12166. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0012166.
FujimuraK. E.LynchS. V. (2015). Microbiota in allergy and asthma and the emerging relationship with the gut microbiome. Cell Host & Microbe, 17(5), 592–602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chom.2015.04.007.
10.
GilbertS. F.SappJ.TauberA. I. (2012). A symbiotic view of life: We have never been individuals. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 87(4), 325–341. https://doi.org/10.1086/668166.
11.
GilbertS. F.TauberA. I. (2016). Rethinking individuality: The dialectics of the holobiont. Biology & Philosophy, 31(6), 839–853. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-016-9541-3.
GramannK.FerrisD. P.GwinJ.MakeigS. (2014). Imaging natural cognition in action. International Journal of Psychophysiology: Official Journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology, 91(1), 22–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2013.09.003.
14.
GramannK.HohlefeldF. U.GehrkeL.KlugM. (2021). Human cortical dynamics during full-body heading changes. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 18186. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-97749-8.
15.
HaahtelaT.HolgateS.PawankarR.AkdisC. A.BenjaponpitakS.CaraballoL.DemainJ.PortnoyJ.von HertzenL.WAO Special Committee on Climate Change and Biodiversity. (2013). The biodiversity hypothesis and allergic disease: World allergy organization position statement. The World Allergy Organization Journal, 6(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/1939-4551-6-3.
16.
HorveP. F.LloydS.MhuireachG. A.DietzL.FretzM.MacCroneG.Van Den WymelenbergK.IshaqS. L. (2020). Building upon current knowledge and techniques of indoor microbiology to construct the next era of theory into microorganisms, health, and the built environment. Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology, 30(2), 219–235. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-019-0157-y.
17.
HuttoD. D.KirchhoffM. D.MyinE. (2014). Extensive enactivism: Why keep it all in?Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 706. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00706.
18.
IshaqS. L.ParadaF. J.WolfP. G.BonillaC. Y.CarneyM. A.BenezraA.WisselE.FriedmanM.DeAngelisK. M.RobinsonJ. M.FahimipourA. K.ManusM. B.GrieneisenL.DietzL. G.PathakA.ChauhanA.KuthyarS.StewartJ. D.DasariM. R.MorarN. (2021). Introducing the microbes and social equity working group: Considering the microbial components of social, environmental, and health justice. mSystems, 6(4), e0047121. https://doi.org/10.1128/msystems.00471-21.
KembelS. W.JonesE.KlineJ.NorthcuttD.StensonJ.WomackA. M.BohannanB. J.BrownG. Z.GreenJ. L. (2012). Architectural design influences the diversity and structure of the built environment microbiome. The ISME Journal, 6(8), 1469–1479. https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2011.211.
21.
KlimovichA. V.BoschT. C. G. (2018). Rethinking the role of the nervous system: Lessons from the hydra holobiont. Bioessays: News and Reviews in Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology, 40(9), e1800060. https://doi.org/10.1002/bies.201800060.
22.
KonvalinkaI.RoepstorffA. (2012). The two-brain approach: how can mutually interacting brains teach us something about social interaction?. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, 215. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2012.00215.
LadouceS.DonaldsonD. I.DudchenkoP. A.IetswaartM. (2016). Understanding minds in real-world environments: Toward a mobile cognition approach. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 10, 694. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00694.
25.
LadouceS.DonaldsonD. I.DudchenkoP. A.IetswaartM. (2019). Mobile EEG identifies the re-allocation of attention during real-world activity. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 15851. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-51996-y.
26.
LyuD.ZajoncJ.PagéA.TanneyC. A. S.ShahA.MonjeziN.MsimbiraL. A.AntarM.NazariM.BackerR.SmithD. L. (2021). Plant holobiont theory: The phytomicrobiome plays a central role in evolution and success. Microorganisms, 9(4), 675. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9040675.
27.
MachN.MoroldoM.RauA.LecardonnelJ.Le MoyecL.RobertC.BarreyE. (2021). Understanding the holobiont: Crosstalk between gut microbiota and mitochondria during long exercise in horse. Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences, 8, 656204. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmolb.2021.656204.
28.
MakeigS.GramannK.JungT. P.SejnowskiT. J.PoiznerH. (2009). Linking brain mind and behavior. International Journal of Psychophysiology: Official Journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology, 73(2), 95–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2008.11.008.
Molero-RamírezF. J.Carro-GodoyR. L. (2022). The hydrated mind, the glycolytic mind, and the holobiont mind. Adaptive Behavior. 2022, 10597123211073534. https://doi.org/10.1177/10597123211073534
31.
NagpalJ.CryanJ. F. (2021). Host genetics, the microbiome & behaviour-a “Holobiont” perspective [Review of Host genetics, the microbiome & behaviour-a “Holobiont” perspective]. Cell Research, 31(8), 832–833. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41422-021-00512-x.
Palacios-GarcíaI.LuarteN.Herrmann-LuneckeM. G.Grasso-CladeraA.ParadaF. J. (2020). Environmental noise is differently associated with negative and positive urban experience: An exploratory first-person pedestrian mobile study in Santiago de Chile (El ruido medioambiental se asocia de una manera diferente a la experiencia urbana negativa y positiva: Un estudio exploratorio en movimiento de peatones en primera persona realizado en Santiago de Chile). Studies in Psychology, 41(3), 580–611. https://doi.org/10.1080/02109395.2020.1795376
34.
Palacios-GarcíaI.ParadaF. J. (2019). Measuring the brain-gut axis in psychological sciences: A necessary challenge. Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, 13, 73. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnint.2019.00073
35.
Palacios-GarcíaI.ParadaF. J. (2021). The holobiont mind: A bridge between 4E cognition and the microbiome. Adaptive Behavior, 2021, 10597123211053071. https://doi.org/10.1177/10597123211053071
36.
ParadaF. J. (2018). Understanding natural cognition in everyday settings: 3 pressing challenges. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 12, 386. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2018.00386.
37.
ParadaF. J.RossiA. (2018). If neuroscience needs behavior, what does psychology need?. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 433. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00433.
38.
ParadaF. J.RossiA. (2020). Perfect timing: Mobile brain/body imaging scaffolds the 4E-cognition research program. The European Journal of Neuroscience, 54(12), 8081–8091. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejn.14783.
39.
Piñeyro SalvidegoitiaM.JacobsenN.BauerA. R.GriffithsB.HanslmayrS.DebenerS. (2019). Out and about: Subsequent memory effect captured in a natural outdoor environment with smartphone EEG. Psychophysiology, 56(5), e13331. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13331.
40.
PostlerT. S.GhoshS. (2017). Understanding the holobiont: How microbial metabolites affect human health and shape the immune system. Cell Metabolism, 26(1), 110–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmet.2017.05.008.
41.
Ramírez-VizcayaS.FroeseT. (2019). The enactive approach to habits: New concepts for the cognitive science of bad habits and addiction. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 301. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00301.
42.
Rojas-LíbanoD.ParadaF. J. (2019). Body-world coupling, sensorimotor mechanisms, and the ontogeny of social cognition. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 3005. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03005.
43.
Rojas-LíbanoD.Wimmer Del SolarJ.Aguilar-RiveraM.Montefusco-SiegmundR.MaldonadoP. E. (2018). Local cortical activity of distant brain areas can phase-lock to the olfactory bulb’s respiratory rhythm in the freely behaving rat. Journal of Neurophysiology, 120(3), 960–972. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00088.2018.
44.
RookG. A.LowryC. A.RaisonC. L. (2013). Microbial “Old Friends.” immunoregulation and Stress Resilience. Evolution, Medicine, and Public Health, 2013(1), 46–64. https://doi.org/10.1093/emph/eot004.
45.
RossiA.ParadaF. J.StewartR.BarwellC.DemasG.AllenC. (2018). Hormonal correlates of exploratory and play-soliciting behavior in domestic dogs. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1559. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01559.
46.
RossiA.SmedemaD.ParadaF. J.AllenC. (2014). Visual attention in dogs and the evolution of non-verbal communication. In HorowitzA. (Ed.), Domestic dog cognition and behavior: The scientific study of canis familiaris (pp. 133–154). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-53994-7_6.
47.
SalasC. E.Rojas-LíbanoD.CastroO.CrucesR.EvansJ.RadovicD.Arévalo-RomeroC.TorresJ.AliagaÁ. (2021). Social isolation after acquired brain injury: Exploring the relationship between network size, functional support, loneliness and mental health. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 2021, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2021.1939062.
48.
Shamay-TsooryS. G.MendelsohnA. (2019). Real-life neuroscience: An ecological approach to brain and behavior research. Perspectives on psychological science. A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 14(5), 841–859. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619856350.
49.
StamperC. E.HoisingtonA. J.GomezO. M.Halweg-EdwardsA. L.SmithD. G.BatesK. L.KinneyK. A.PostolacheT. T.BrennerL. A.RookG. A.LowryC. A. (2016). The microbiome of the built environment and human behavior: Implications for emotional health and well-being in postmodern western societies. International Review of Neurobiology, 131, 289–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.irn.2016.07.006.
50.
ThelenE.SmithL. B. (1996) A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. MIT Press.
51.
VarelaF. J.ThompsonE.RoschE. (1991). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. MIT Press.
Zilber-RosenbergI.RosenbergE. (2008). Role of microorganisms in the evolution of animals and plants: The hologenome theory of evolution. FEMS Microbiology Reviews, 32(5), 723–735. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6976.2008.00123.x.