Interview with Alberto Domínguez Martínez by Nira Llarena,  press writer and creative.

As Alberto Domínguez Martínez aptly puts it in this interview, “neuroscience is all the rage.” He’s absolutely right, and this surge of interest in our brains is undoubtedly due to people like him, who are able to explain profoundly complex issues in an accessible and engaging way. A conversation that threatened to become highly technical, yet felt like a relaxed after-dinner chat. A professor of Basic Psychology and director of the University Institute of Neuroscience at the University of La Laguna (IUNE), Alberto has spent years studying how our minds work, how we process language, and what happens in our brains when we speak, remember, or even when we get sick.
The ensuing conversation is a journey through highly topical issues—from applied artificial intelligence to so-called neurorights—and a demonstration of the value of the scientific projects carried out here.

You are a professor of Psychology and have specialized in the cognitive neuroscience of language. I gather that the University Institute of Neuroscience (IUNE) brings together researchers from very diverse fields, is that correct?

Yes, absolutely. At the institute, we have around fifty full members. Each one has their own line of research and they are also professors at the University of La Laguna. In addition, there are just as many, or even more, associate members. And their professional fields are very diverse: there are staff from the University Hospital of the Canary Islands and the Hospital de la Candelaria, neurologists from private centers, and researchers from numerous academic fields. We bring together a very wide variety of researchers because, although it is a neuroscience institute in general, it has a certain focus on cognitive neuroscience. For example, there are many psychologists within the institute, but we also have physiologists, biologists, and professors from the Faculty of Medicine who work at the more experimental levels of neuronal research.

I imagine this interdisciplinarity will result in very interesting and valuable projects, can you tell us about one?

Yes, collaboration is one of our greatest strengths. There are many projects underway. A significant part of our work focuses on studying brain activity and how certain neural circuits function. For example, there are lines of research investigating disorders such as OCD, and a project on brain magnetic stimulation in schizophrenia has recently been launched, which also involves educational psychologists and is funded by the Tenerife Island Council.
There is also research on Parkinson's disease, such as the project led by Pedro Barroso, which focuses on dopaminergic neurons. And other projects are more focused on neuropsychology, such as Naira Delgado's study, which analyzes empathy processes in healthcare professionals and how they are affected by daily exposure to patient suffering.
In the field of neuroimaging, we have Niels Janssen, an expert in magnetic resonance imaging who is working on precisely identifying the different regions of the hippocampus. And in the area of ​​engineering, Ernesto Pereda is developing research with electroencephalograms, exploring algorithms to locate brain functions from these recordings.
In short, these are very diverse lines of research that reflect both the interests of those who investigate and the funding possibilities that we are obtaining.

The institute brings together psychologists, physiologists,
biologists, and physicians who investigate
the brain together from different perspectives,
generating innovative projects
in cognitive neuroscience.

 

I know they've worked with artificial intelligence to diagnose mental disorders. How can AI change the way we understand and treat the human mind?

Artificial intelligence and machine learning have been used in research for some time, but their use is now intensifying because they allow for the simultaneous analysis of much more information. Previously, experiments studied isolated variables to see how they affected brain activity, but now, with the computing power of computers and algorithms, multiple data points can be processed at once, opening up countless possibilities.
For example, in one of our projects, we are analyzing voice and speech characteristics to classify neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and multiple sclerosis, based solely on a recording. The idea is that, in the future, mass screening could be done, even by telephone, to detect early signs of these diseases simply by listening to how a person speaks.
There is already data indicating that this could be achieved. For example, an interesting marker we use for Alzheimer's is "semantic granularity," which measures whether the terms a patient uses to name objects are precise or too general. For instance, instead of saying "dog," someone with Alzheimer's might say "animal" or "creature." These types of patterns are automatically detected using machine learning by analyzing patient narratives.
Ultimately, these technologies have great potential to improve early diagnosis not only in neurodegenerative diseases, but also in mental disorders and other areas.

How do you assess the role of the IUNE within the research opportunities in the Canary Islands? In other words, has the Institute's growth made it easier for more young people from the Canary Islands to train in neuroscience?

Neuroscience is a very trendy topic, but our merit lies not in creating that interest, but in offering a platform for students from the Canary Islands and elsewhere to truly develop in this field. Here, we provide them with training, doctoral options, and the opportunity to complete their theses with the institute's research teams. We have many predoctoral students and constantly engage in outreach; for example, educational institutions visit us for open days, and there are always students who are drawn to neuroscience. And it's no surprise; it's a very appealing area for those studying psychology, biomedicine, or biology, and it represents a very attractive career path.
Our goal, as in any research institute, is to attract and retain talent. Although some researchers go on to work abroad, we have also managed to attract international students, such as several Chinese doctoral students who completed their theses here and are now professors at leading universities in their country, such as Shanghai University and Dalian University. We have also had students from Chile and Argentina, and many postdoctoral researchers working with us; right now, for example, we have a researcher who has worked at prestigious centers like Cambridge and the BCBL in Spain.
The roadmap for a student from the Canary Islands who wants to dedicate themselves to neuroscience is to train with us, completing a master's degree and then a doctorate. Afterward, they can obtain predoctoral contracts that may be funded by the Government of the Canary Islands. For example, one of our doctoral students is currently doing a research stay at the University of Bologna and will then need to do a postdoctoral fellowship elsewhere, but our intention is that, once she is an established researcher, she can return to the institute. Of course, all of this depends on us having the necessary funding, something we will continue to advocate for.

The brain functions as an interconnected network,
not as isolated compartments.

I can't help but ask him what is now known about the human brain, which a few years ago was almost a dogma and, with the latest research, has changed perspective.

There are many myths in neuroscience, such as the common one about using "10% of the brain," but one that I find particularly relevant and that has changed over time is the idea that each brain function is located in a specific, isolated area. For example, we know that areas like Broca's and Wernicke's are key for language, but today we understand that speaking or understanding a word activates a large network of brain regions, not just those specific areas.
When you say "red ball," visual areas for color and shape are activated, but also motor areas related to movement. The entire brain functions as interconnected circuits, not isolated compartments. This is reflected even in everyday situations, like a soccer coach moving his leg while watching his players, reflexively activating those motor areas. A neurologist from the beginning of the century said that "cells that fire together, stay together," meaning that the connections between neurons are strengthened when they work simultaneously, integrating different aspects of the same experience so that we perceive it as a single thing, like "red ball." This approach is closely related to embodiment theory, which argues that to understand something, you also need to represent how your body interacts with it. In other words, understanding is not just an isolated brain matter, but involves integration with bodily experience. Therefore
, the idea of ​​the "grandmother neuron"—a single neuron that stores someone's image—is a myth: brain representation is distributed and encompasses many experiences and memories. Projects like the Brain Project in the United States and European initiatives have made significant progress in mapping the brain at the microcellular level, similar to the Human Genome Project, identifying all types of neurons. But the crucial point is not just knowing the biology or biochemistry of neurons, but understanding their relationship to cognitive functions, emotions, and human experience.

There's a concept I came across while preparing for this interview: "neuro-rights." Could you tell us a little about this?

Well, it's a relatively new concept. At this international campus, we'll have Jesús Mercader, a law professor at Carlos III University, who is a true expert on the subject. To be honest, I think no one is entirely clear on what it entails yet, partly because the current scope of neuroscience is still limited. Legislating on something we don't fully understand, and whose reach we don't know in 10 or 20 years, is very complex. Even so, progress is being made. The only country that has legislated on this is Chile, which is ahead of us in this area. It's important that other countries also begin to prepare, because if in the future we manage to intervene in or modulate brain activity, or even read thoughts, the ethical and legal impact will be enormous. It could jeopardize fundamental principles of civilization.
Fortunately, efforts are underway. In response to the pandemic, the Spanish Parliament created Office C—a scientific advisory office—which has produced several reports, two of them on neuroscience: one focused on practical and ethical aspects, and the other on neurodegenerative diseases and aging. These are invaluable documents, prepared by experts such as Rafael Yuste, who will also deliver the closing address at this conference. Indeed, although the issue of neurorights is still developing, it is a key topic for the future.

Chile is the only
country that has legislated on
neurorights, a concept still
under construction that could change
the future of mental privacy and
brain protection.

Then there's the issue of technology, for example, machines for neural stimulation. To what extent could this become a risk?

Yes, the field is growing tremendously, but the biggest challenge is that the technologies are constantly changing. These technologies are what allow us to access brain data. In our lab, for example, we perform electroencephalography (EEG) recordings every day on students and patients. Always with informed consent and confidentiality protocols. But the truth is that anyone with the right equipment can record and store neural data, and that poses a dilemma: what will happen when, in the future, we can interpret that data in ways we can't even imagine today? Imagine if we could predict whether a person will develop a neurological disease. That's valuable information not only for medicine, but also for insurance companies or businesses, which could deny insurance or employment based on that prediction. It would be very dangerous. And we're not just talking about extracting data from the brain, but also about intervening in it. With brain stimulation, for example, we introduce variables directly into neuronal activity.
There are also BCI (Brain-Computer Interface) devices, which allow direct communication between the brain and a machine. They are an incredible opportunity—imagine a person with paralysis being able to move a robotic prosthesis with their thoughts—but they also open the door to potentially nefarious uses.
I try to be optimistic. Despite the risks, I think that as humanity we have demonstrated the capacity to contain dangerous technologies. Let's hope that with neuroscience we can set limits and use these advances for what really matters, which is curing diseases and improving mental health and well-being. That's why it's urgent to establish regulatory frameworks. Today, brain stimulation is being applied in private clinics without clear legislation. The FDA in the US has only approved its use in cases of treatment-resistant depression, and in Europe there is still no firm regulation.

One way to cultivate that optimism is to nurture shared knowledge; what will people find on this Campus in the area of ​​Neuroscience?

All the participants have fascinating profiles. For example, Rafael Yuste, who will give the closing lecture, is a leading neuroscientist at Columbia University and a renowned science communicator. Jesús Mercader, a law professor at Carlos III University, will also be there, speaking about the neurorights we mentioned earlier. Katya Rubia, an expert in ADHD and hyperactivity from a brain-based perspective, from King's College London, and a CSIC researcher who will talk about neurotechnologies, will also be participating.
And then there's a roundtable discussion that particularly interests us, coordinated by Ernesto Pereda, our leading engineer at IUNE. He will moderate a conversation with three neuroscientists from the institute: Raquel Marín, a neurophysiologist; Naira Delgado, an expert in social psychology; and María Ángeles Alonso, who researches memory processes.
So, from our perspective, we think the program is top-notch. Furthermore, I want to emphasize the value of institutions like the La Laguna City Council and the CajaCanarias Foundation supporting a summer university of this caliber. In many other cities, summer universities are well-established as spaces for cultural dissemination and engagement. And La Laguna, with its rich history and heritage, deserved to have such an offering, which can also become a significant attraction for scientific and educational tourism. So I sincerely applaud it.