Neuroscience Perception Avatars
Neuroscience Perception Avatars
The depth of your question shapes what you will perceive next.
In evidence-based science, a “good question” is not just curiosity: it defines the slice of reality you will observe (time window, context, body, culture) and the kind of data that will make sense.
Why we use Avatars
Our Avatars / Elements / Illustrative Mascots exist for one simple (and powerful) reason:
when a researcher intentionally “stands in” a different avatar, they tend to ask different questions — and they tend to interpret the same dataset through different lenses.
That is not a flaw. It is a method.
Human behavior is multidimensional. Any study measures partials, not the whole.
Research captures behavioral reflections through signals and biosignals (EEG, fNIRS, SpO₂, HRV, GSR, movement, speech, video, etc.) inside a time window and a territory.
The avatar acts as a “slice-guide”: it helps decide what to ask, what to control, what to measure, and how to interpret.
We currently work with 08 avatars.
Connectomes in action: Paper–Rock–Scissors
We organize functional connectome modes as three operational states (linked to Kahneman’s “fast vs slow thinking,” as a practical metaphor):
Scissors — Prefrontal / “Think Slow”
More prefrontal recruitment
Cut, classify, register, catalog
Logic, planning, executive control
Great for method; risky when it becomes rigidity
Rock — Sensorimotor / “Think Fast”
More sensorimotor recruitment
Replicate the known (movement and/or cognition)
Habits, quick decisions, defense/attack/escape
Efficient; risky when it becomes autopilot
Paper — Fruition + Metacognition (Zone 2)
Fruition with metacognition (open, regulated, creative)
Attention broadens, the body stabilizes, belonging reorganizes choices
Supports high performance with psychological safety
Zones 1–2–3 (where these modes stabilize)
Zone 1: everyday life in task mode (functional mix of Scissors + Rock)
Zone 2: Paper (Fruition + metacognition), return to body and belonging
Zone 3: capture by rigid scripts/ideologies; interoception/proprioception get silenced (defensive Rock + rigid Scissors, without real Paper)
The 08 Avatars (revised definitions)
1) Brainlly (Jellyfish) — Living Neurodynamics of Perception
Represents: neurons + glia + blood (neurovascular coupling).
Typical questions: “What neurophysiological pattern accompanies this state?” “How do transitions Zone 1↔2 or Zone 3→2 show up in biosignals?”
Typical measures: EEG, fNIRS, SpO₂, pupil, reaction time.
2) Iam (Continuous lines) — Affect, Motivation, and 1st-person Consciousness
Represents: affective states, bonds, motivations, emotions and feelings shaping decisions and episodic memory.
Typical questions: “What regulates vs dysregulates this body?” “Which short emotion is sustaining a stable feeling?”
Typical measures: HRV, GSR, respiration, facial cues, brief self-report scales.
3) Olmeca (LatAm Anthropology) — Culture, Life History, and the Social Connectome
Represents: language, habits, rituals, education, class, trauma, cultural territory + development (with epigenetic bridges).
Typical questions: “What here is biography/culture?” “Why does the same stimulus mean different things across people?”
Typical tools: contextual tasks, short interviews, narrative analysis, sociocultural variables.
4) Yagé (States of Consciousness) — Mode Shifting and Applied Metacognition
Represents: noticing perception itself and flexing constructs (values, beliefs, principles).
Core function: the “gearbox” that helps identify and shift from rigid Rock/Scissors into Paper (Zone 2) when possible.
5) APUS — Body-Territory / Extended Proprioception
Represents: environment entering the body: posture, gravity, space, rhythm, breath, “territory as an extension of the body.”
Typical questions: “Which environmental factor reorganizes the body?” “How does territory reshape focus, emotion, and decision?”
Typical measures: movement/IMU, posture, breathing, HRV, trajectories in space.
6) Jiwasa — Synchrony/Desynchrony between DNAs in a Shared Task (same biome)
Represents: group-level coupling: coordination, conflict, cohesion, affect contagion, social timing.
Typical questions: “Is the group in collective Zone 2 or collective Zone 3?” “Where is synchrony real vs synchrony-by-pressure?”
Typical measures: hyperscanning (EEG/fNIRS), HRV/respiration synchrony, speech turn-taking metrics.
7) Math/Hep — Evidence-based Science: Relationship and Causality
Represents: experimental design, measurement, bias control, inference.
Key point: correlation is often not enough — the method must test causality when the question demands it.
Typical questions: “What do I manipulate?” “What outcome do I measure?” “Which control prevents self-deception?”
Rule: one testable hypothesis at a time (Hep = “1”).
Guiding line: Your body feels. Your brain learns. Science measures. Experiments test causality.
8) DANA (DNA Avatar) — DNA Intelligence and Living Organization in Territory
Represents: original biological intelligence inscribed in DNA, regulated by rhythms, environment, and biosocial belonging.
Direct bridges: with APUS (territory regulates expression/stability) and Jiwasa (shared-biome coupling modulates collective dynamics).
Typical questions: “What sustains regulation biologically?” “Which conditions keep Zone 2 plausible and stable over time?”
Keeping Avatars scientifically “alive”
To keep avatars as strong references in evidence-based science, each avatar maintains a living dossier of publications:
New relevant papers get attached to an avatar (or a bridge between avatars).
Math/Hep audits methods: variables, controls, limitations, correlation vs causality.
The avatar becomes a sharper lens: better questions, cleaner designs, clearer interpretations.
Minimal scientific base (why avatars exist)
WEIRD bias & generalization problem: Behavioral science often overgeneralizes from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic samples, which can be non-representative of humanity.
Sampling bias is persistent (especially in development): High-impact developmental research remains heavily skewed toward WEIRD populations, motivating structural corrections in designs and interpretations.
Culture is under-modeled in brain development research: Developmental cognitive neuroscience has historically paid limited attention to cultural/ethnic variation (e.g., strong Western-country dominance in sampled publications).
Culture–Behavior–Brain loop: A formal framework supports the idea that culture shapes brain activity via behavior, and the brain feeds back into culture through behavioral influence—exactly the logic behind “multiple avatar lenses.”
Dialogical Multiplication / Indigenous psychology principles: A robust intercultural framework supports “listening without erasing the other,” aligning with Olmeca and the ethics of interpretation.
Decolonizing research methodologies: Research with Indigenous peoples is not politically neutral; decolonial methodology offers guardrails against epistemic erasure and extractive interpretation—strengthening Math/Hep’s bias-control commitments.
