Neuro-Link is committed to offering sound scientifically based assessments and solutions to our clients. The science behind neuro-agility, has a sound physiological basis and we see the results at work every day.
Behavioral sciences are defined by use of systematic, empirical and critical investigation and observation of behaviors. These behaviors must have a scientific or physiological basis for their occurrence, as no action or response can arise form a non-existing force. Using neuroscience, we are able to tie the behavioral sciences into neuroscience. Stated differently, we observe certain behaviors and would like to understand why these behaviors occur. This is where neuroscience comes into the equation – to understand the ‘why’ of the behaviors.
Neuro-Link has no need to sway people with neuroscientific claims. Neuroscience has become an interdisciplinary science that is there for people to gain better understanding of their behaviors. Throughout the 20th century, there was a lot of resistance to entertaining brain/mind/behavior patterns, but modern neuroscience, with its many well demonstrated neuro-anatomical and neuro-chemical findings, can provide ways to evaluate these possibilities in more scientifically rigorous ways.
The unique Neuro Agility Profile™ assessment consist of many concepts that is fresh on the grid like the concepts of neurological design, neurological stress, dominance, neuro-flexibility and neuro-agility. Although these constructs can benefit from more research, it this does not mean that the science behind them is new. New insights arise from interdisciplinary studies. The new concepts are based on fresh insights born from the development needs of people and businesses in a changing world, but the science behind these concepts are sound. There is a compelling body of scientific research that confirms the validity of these concepts.
One of the debated components of neuro-agility is the issue of left – right brain hemisphere labels. Prevailing research in neuroscience avoids the definite left-right brain labels, as many have oversimplified the conclusions of Nobel Prize Laureate Roger Sperry’s discovery of the differences of left- and right brain hemisphere processing and mental functions. The problem is not that the research is incorrect, rather than misinterpretation of the implications of the research. Accurate interpretation requires a multi-disciplinary understanding of concepts like the influence of dominance and mid-line crossing on the functioning of the hemispheres, as neuroscience of learning is an interdisciplinary science. Few authorities offer this approach as most have very specific areas of expertise.
Furthermore, many people are using incorrect verbal explanations and terminology that creates disparity between the research and implications. Scientists therefore now use the term “relative lateralization”, as much of Roger Sperry’s original work remains valid today.
It can still safely be said that the left hemisphere processes information in an analytical, sequential way, while the right hemisphere processes information in a random holistic way. Although we are using both hemispheres of the brain most of the time, it can also be said with impunity that at any moment, there will be more activity in one hemisphere than the other. It can also not be argued that some people starts solving problems by following a more logical, analytical approach and others follow a more conceptual, holistic and creative approach. All people think, learn, create and solve problems, but in different ways, depending on our preferences.
One will find many research papers concluding that there is evidence for left and right hemispheric preferences. There will also always be studies that do not achieve significant findings. What one should keep in mind, is that if a few research papers claim something is not true for the particular outcomes that they were trying to measure, it does not necessarily mean that the main concept is unfounded. We need to keep in mind what was measured, how was it measured, how big was their sample, what was their sample quantity, what methods did they use and ultimately, what were the defined objectives and limitations of the research conducted. All of these factors have an influence on the outcomes achieved by research.
When we talk about left and right hemispheric preferences, we do not define it as one hemisphere overpowering the other, but as one hemisphere taking the lead when processing information and the other following slightly more passively. This does not mean that we only use the “dominant hemisphere” and that the other hemisphere is not working. All people use both hemispheres most of the time, making us whole brained people. There will however, always be a hemisphere actively leading in the task at hand and one following more passively. For example, if asked about your hand dominance, you would either respond “right hand dominant or left hand dominant”. When someone is right hand dominant, it does not mean that their left hand cannot be used. However, the right hand feels more natural to use than the left hand, meaning that there is one actively leading and another passively following. The same would apply to the eyes, ears and brain hemispheres.