Social, legal, and ethical implications of cognitive neuroscience: "Neuroethics" for short

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Volumn 19, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 363-364

  Farah, Martha J ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BRAIN DEPTH STIMULATION; BRAIN FUNCTION; COGNITION; EDITORIAL; ETHICS; HUMAN; LEGAL ASPECT; NEUROIMAGING; NEUROSCIENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SOCIAL ASPECT;

BRAIN; COGNITIVE SCIENCE; HUMANS; LEGISLATION, MEDICAL;

EID: 33847785057     PISSN: 0898929X     EISSN: 15308898     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/jocn.2007.19.3.363     Document Type: Editorial

References (4)

1. Farah, M. J., Illes, J., Cook-Deegan, R., Gardner, H., Kandel, E., King, P., et al. (2004). Neurocognitive enhancement: What can we do and what should we do? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5, 421-425.
2. Greene, J. D., & Cohen, J. D. (2004). For the law, neuroscience changes nothing and everything. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, Special Issue on Law and the Brain, 359, 1775-1785.
3. Illes, J., Kirschen, M. P., Edwards, E., Stanford, L. R., Bandettini, P., Cho, M. K., et al. (2006). Working Group on Incidental Findings in Brain Imaging Research. Ethics. Incidental findings in brain imaging research. Science, 311, 783-784.
4. Phelps, E. A., & Thomas, L. A. (2003). Race, behavior and the brain. Political Psychology, 24, 747-759.