I like your article and your interpretation of the data seems to me to be adequate. However I don't see a proper effort put forth in the study to determine the role of emotions in triggering the part of the brain they are promoting as significant. I would much rather see the study make longer comparisons of the scans to more questions which would be structured to view how the brain responds when not emotionally involved and how it does when emotions are triggered. e.g. 5-10 questions guaranteed to be neutral, (which I admit for many subjects may be rather difficult to create) and 5-10 questions known to be emotional triggers.
Compare that data with another group of subjects which are known to be generally unemotional when considering the same triggers. Then good value can be attained by showing evidence for how emotions affect beliefs. Then to really get serious with the study data examine the two groups separately to see if there is a way to release the emotional group through some from of therapy a.k.a. benign manipulation and for the other group try to create emotional triggers through malign manipulation to see if they are susceptible as well under the proper conditions. Thereby presenting evidence that if one wishes to be logically stable, they must first be emotionally stable. I believe it is not enough to present half the data and half the case when so much more value is there to be derived.
KUTGW, Rollin.