Public attitudes toward cognitive enhancement

Neuroethics

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 173-188

  Fitz, Nicholas S ^a   Nadler, Roland ^a   Manogaran, Praveena ^a   Chong, Eugene W J ^a   Reiner, Peter B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Authenticity; Cognitive enhancement; Experimental neuroethics; Fairness; Moral psychology; Public attitudes; Regulatory policy

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ADVERSE OUTCOME; ARTICLE; COGNITION; COGNITIVE ENHANCEMENT; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEARING IMPAIRMENT; HUMAN; INSOMNIA; MALE; MENTAL CAPACITY; MIGRAINE; MORALITY; PEER PRESSURE; PHARMACOLOGICAL COGNITIVE ENHANCEMENT; PHARMACOLOGICAL PROCEDURES; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC RELATIONS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; RISK FACTOR; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SKIN REDNESS; SOCIAL ATTITUDE; VIGNETTE; VISUAL IMPAIRMENT;

EID: 84903695333     PISSN: 18745490     EISSN: 18745504     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s12152-013-9190-z     Document Type: Article

References (113)

1. Beddington, John, Cary L. Cooper, John Field, Usha Goswami, Felicia A. Huppert, Rachel Jenkins, Hannah S. Jones, Tom B.L. Kirkwood, Barbara J. Sahakian, and Sandy M. Thomas. 2008. The mental wealth of nations. Nature 455: 1057-1060.
2. Hughes, James. 2009. TechnoProgressive biopolitics and human enhancement. In Progress in bioethics, eds. J. Moreno and S. Berger, 163-188. Cambridge: MIT Press.
3. Reiner, P.B. 2013. The biopolitics of cognitive enhancement. In Cognitive Enhancement: an interdisciplinary perspective. Dordrecht: Springer Science + Business Media.
4. Hyman, Steven E. 2011. Cognitive enhancement: Promises and perils. Neuron 69: 595-598. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.02.012.
5. Farah, Martha J.; Judy Illes, Robert Cook-Deegan, Howard Gardner, Eric Kandel, Patricia King, Eric Parens, Barbara Sahakian, and Paul Root Wolpe. 2004. Neurocognitive enhancement: What can we do and what should we do? Nature Reviews Neuroscience 5: 421-425. doi: 10.1038/nrn1390.
6. Greely, Henry, Barbara Sahakian, John Harris, Ronald C. Kessler, Michael Gazzaniga, Philip Campbell, and Martha J. Farah. 2008. Towards responsible use of cognitive-enhancing drugs by the healthy. Nature 456: 702-705. doi: 10.1038/456702a. Nature Publishing Group.
7. Levy, Neil. 2007. Neuroethics: Challenges for the 21st century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8. O'Connor, Cliodhna, Geraint Rees, and Helene Joffe. 2012. Neuroscience in the public sphere. Neuron 74: 220-226. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.04.004.
9. Allport, Gordon. 1935. Attitudes. In A handbook of social psychology, 798-844. Worcester: Clark University Press.
10. Albarracin, Dolores, Blair T Johnson, and Mark P Zanna. 2005. The handbook of attitudes. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
11. Eagly, Alice H, and Shelly Chaiken. 1993. Psychology of attitudes. Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.
12. Taylor, Charles. 1991. The malaise of modernity. Toronto: House of Anansi Press Ltd.
13. Bostrom, Nick, and Rebecca Roache. 2011. Smart policy: cognitive enhancement in the public interest. In Enhancing Human Capabilities, eds. Julian Savulescu, Ruud ter Meulen, Guy Kahane, 138-152. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
14. Greely, Henry T. 2010. Of nails and hammers: Human biological enhancement and U.S. policy tools. In Enhancing Human Capacities, eds. Julian Savulescu, Ruud ter Meulen, Guy Kahane, 503-520. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
15. Schermer, Maartje, Ineke Bolt, Reinoud Jongh, and Berend Olivier. 2009. The future of psychopharmacological enhancements: Expectations and policies. Neuroethics 2: 75-87. doi: 10.1007/s12152-009-9032-1.
16. Lucke, Jayne, and Brad Partridge. 2013. Towards a smart population: A public health framework for cognitive enhancement. Neuroethics. 6:419-427. doi: 10.1007/s12152-012-9167-3.
17. Dubljevic, Veljko. 2012. Toward a legitimate public policy on cognition-enhancement drugs. AJOB Neuroscience 3: 29-33. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2012.700681.
18. Lin, P.; and F. Allhoff. 2008. Against unrestricted human enhancement. Journal of Evolution & Technology 18: 35.
19. The President's Council on Bioethics. 2003. Beyond therapy: Biotechnology and the pursuit of happiness. Washington: The President's Council on Bioethics.
20. British Medical Association. 2007. Boosting your brainpower: Ethical aspects of cognitive enhancements. A discussion paper from the British Medical Association. London: British Medical Association.
21. Larriviere, D.; M.A. Williams, M. Rizzo, and R.J. Bonnie. 2009. Responding to requests from adult patients for neuroenhancements: Guidance of the Ethics, Law and Humanities Committee. Neurology 73: 1406-1412.
22. Cote, Marie-Claude. 2009. Psychotropic drugs and expanded uses: An ethical perspective. Quebec City: Commission de l'ethique de la science et de la technologie.
23. Academy of Medical Sciences, the British Academy, the Royal Academy of Engineering and the Royal Society. 2012. Human enhancement and the future of work. London: Academy of Medical Sciences.
24. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. 2013. Novel neurotechnologies: Intervening in the brain. Swindon: Nuffield Council on Bioethics.
25. Slob, Marjan, Peter Raeymaekers, and Karin Rondia. 2005. Meeting of minds: European citizen's deliberation on brain science. London: Meeting of Minds Partner Consortium.
26. Maher, Brendan. 2008. Poll results: Look who's doping. Nature 452: 674-675. doi: 10.1038/452674a.
27. Banjo, Opeyemi C.; Roland Nadler, and Peter B. Reiner. 2010. Physician attitudes towards pharmacological cognitive enhancement: Safety concerns are paramount. PLoS ONE 5(12): e14322. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0014322.t003.
28. Forlini, C.; and E. Racine. 2012. Stakeholder perspectives and reactions to "academic" cognitive enhancement: Unsuspected meaning of ambivalence and analogies. Public Understanding of Science 21: 606-625. doi: 10.1177/0963662510385062.
29. Hotze, Timothy D.; Kavita Shah, Emily E. Anderson, and Matthew K. Wynia. 2011. "Doctor, would you prescribe a pill to help me... ?" a national survey of physicians on using medicine for human enhancement. The American Journal of Bioethics 11: 3-13. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2011.534957.
30. Franke, Andreas G.; Christiana Bagusat, Pavel Dietz, Isabell Hoffmann, Perikles Simon, Rolf Ulrich, and Klaus Lieb. 2013. Use of illicit and prescription drugs for cognitive or mood enhancement among surgeons. BMC Medicine 11: 102. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-11-102.
31. Bell, Stephanie, Brad Partridge, Jayne Lucke, and Wayne Hall. 2013. Australian university students' attitudes towards the acceptability and regulation of pharmaceuticals to improve academic performance. Neuroethics 6: 197-205. doi: 10.1007/s12152-012-9153-9. Springer.
32. Forlini, Cynthia, and Eric Racine. 2012. Added stakeholders, added Value(s) to the cognitive enhancement debate: Are academic discourse and professional policies sidestepping values of stakeholders? AJOB Primary Research 3: 33-47. doi: 10.1080/21507716.2011.645116. Taylor & Francis Group.
33. Franke, Andreas G.; Caroline Bonertz, Michaela Christmann, Stefan Engeser, and Klaus Lieb. 2012. Attitudes toward cognitive enhancement in users and nonusers of stimulants for cognitive enhancement: A pilot study. AJOB Primary Research 3: 48-57. doi: 10.1080/21507716.2011.608411.
34. Sabini, John, and John Monterosso. 2005. Judgments of the fairness of using performance enhancing drugs. Ethics & Behavior 15: 81-94. doi: 10.1207/s15327019eb1501-6.
35. Sattler, Sebastian, Carsten Sauer, Guido Mehlkop, and Peter Graeff. 2013. The rational for consuming cognitive enhancement drugs in university students and teachers. PLoS ONE 8(7): 1-10.
36. Pillow, David R.; Lavelda J. Naylor, and Glenn P. Malone. 2012. Beliefs regarding stimulant medication effects among college students with a history of past or current usage. Journal of Attention Disorders. doi: 10.1177/ 1087054712459755.
37. Bolt, Ineke, and Maartje Schermer. 2009. Psychopharmaceutical enhancers: Enhancing identity? Neuroethics 2: 103-111. doi: 10.1007/s12152-008-9031-7.
38. Singh, Ilina. 2012. VOICES Study: Final Report. London, UK.
39. Sarewitz, Daniel. 2010. World view: Not by experts alone. Nature 466: 688-688. doi: 10.1038/466688a.
40. Schicktanz, Silke, Mark Schweda, and Brian Wynne. 2012. The ethics of 'public understanding of ethics'-why and how bioethics expertise should include public and patients' voices. Medicine, Health Care, and Philosophy 15: 129-139. doi: 10.1007/s11019-011-9321-4.
41. Salloch, Sabine, Jochen Vollmann, and Jan Schildmann. 2013. Ethics by opinion poll? The functions of attitudes research for normative deliberations in medical ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2012-101253.
42. Knobe, Joshua, and Shaun Nichols. 2008. Experimental philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press.
43. Nisbett, Richard E.; and Timothy D. Wilson. 1977. Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological review 84: 231-259.
44. Murphy, James J.; P. Geoffrey Allen, Thomas H. Stevens, and Darryl Weatherhead. 2005. A meta-analysis of hypothetical bias in stated preference valuation. Environmental and Resource Economics 30: 313-325. doi: 10.1007/s10640-004-3332-z.
45. Burstin, K.; E.B. Doughtie, and A. Raphaeli. 1980. Contrastive vignette technique: An indirect methodology designed to address reactive social attitude measurement. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 10: 147-165.
46. Nichols, Austin L.; and Jon K. Maner. 2008. The good-subject effect: Investigating participant demand characteristics. The Journal of general psychology 135: 151-165. doi: 10.3200/GENP.135.2.151-166.
47. Finch, J. 1987. The vignette technique in survey research. Sociology 21: 105-114. Sage Publications.
48. Knobe, Joshua. 2003. Intentional action and side effects in ordinary language. Analysis 63: 190-194.
49. Nichols, Shaun. 2011. Experimental philosophy and the problem of free will. Science 331: 1401-1403. doi: 10.1126/science.1192931.
50. Krosnick, J.A. 1999. Survey research. Annual Review of Psychology 50: 537-567. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.537.
51. Eriksson, Kimmo, and Brent Simpson. 2010. Emotional reactions to losing explain gender differences in entering a risky lottery. Judgment and Decision Making 5: 159-163.
52. Rand, David G. 2012. The promise of Mechanical Turk: How online labor markets can help theorists run behavioral experiments. Journal of theoretical biology 299: 172-179. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2011.03.004.
53. Paolacci, Gabriele, Jesse Chandler, and Panagiotis Ipeirotis. 2010. Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Judgment and Decision Making 5: 411-419.
54. Horton, John J.; David G. Rand, and Richard J. Zeckhauser. 2011. The online laboratory: Conducting experiments in a real labor market. Experimental Economics 14: 399-425. doi: 10.1007/s10683-011-9273-9.
55. Berinsky, Adam J.; Gregory A. Huber, and Gabriel S. Lenz. 2012. Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: Amazon. com's mechanical turk. Political Analysis 20: 351-368.
56. Buhrmester, Michael, Tracy Kwang, and Samuel D. Gosling. 2011. Amazon's Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science 6: 3-5.
57. Henrich, Joseph, Steven J. Heine, and Ara Norenzayan. 2010. The weirdest people in the world? The Behavioral and brain sciences 33: 61-135. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X0999152X.
58. Cohen, Jacob. 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence: Erlbaum.
59. Martel, Laurent, and France-Pascale Menard. 2012. The Canadian population in 2011: age and sex. 98-311-X2011001. www.12.statcan.gc.ca. Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada.
60. Howden, L.M.; and J.A. Meyer. 2011. Age and sex composition: 2010. Washington: US Census Bureau.
61. Harris, John. 2007. Enhancing evolution: The ethical case for making better people. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
62. Fukuyama, Francis. 2002. Our posthuman future. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
63. Reiner, P.B. 2010. Distinguishing between restoration and enhancement in neuropharmacology. Virtual Mentor 12: 885.
64. Parens, Erik. 1998. Is better always good?: The enhancement project. Hastings Center Report 28: s1-s17.
65. Daniels, Norman. 2000. Normal functioning and the treatment-enhancement distinction. Camb Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 9: 309-322.
66. Nitsche, Michael A.; and Walter Paulus. 2011. Transcranial direct current stimulation-update 2011. Restorative neurology and neuroscience 29: 463-492. doi: 10.3233/RNN-2011-0618.
67. Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky. 1979. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica XLVII: 263-291.
68. Vedder, A.; and L. Klaming. 2010. Human enhancement for the common good - Using neurotechnologies to improve eyewitness memory. AJOB Neuroscience 1. Taylor & Francis: 22-33.
69. Kahneman, Daniel. 2011. Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
70. Ariely, Dan. 2008. Predictably irrational: The hidden forces that shape our decisions. New York: HarperCollins.
71. Fernandes, Maria F.; and Donna M. Randall. 1992. The nature of social desirability response effects in ethics research. Business Ethics Quarterly 2: 183-205. doi: 10.2307/3857570.
72. King, Maryon F.; and Gordon C. Bruner. 2000. Social desirability bias: A neglected aspect of validity testing. Psychology & Marketing 17: 79-103.
73. Fisher, Robert J. 1993. Social desirability bias and the validity of indirect questioning. Journal of Consumer Research 20: 303-315.
74. Parens, Erik. 1998. Enhancing human traits. Washington: Georgetown University Press.
75. Chatterjee, A. 2004. Cosmetic neurology. Neurology 63: 968-974.
76. Fehr, Ernst, and Colin F. Camerer. 2007. Social neuroeconomics: The neural circuitry of social preferences. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 11: 419-427. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2007.09.002.
77. Arrow, Kenneth Joseph, Samuel Bowles, and Steven N Durlauf. 2000. Meritocracy and economic inequality. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
78. Almås, Ingvild, Alexander W. Cappelen, Erik Ø. Sørensen, and Bertil Tungodden. 2010. Fairness and the development of inequality acceptance. Science 328: 1176-1178. doi: 10.1126/science.1187300.
79. Cappelen, A.W.; E.Ø. Sørensen, and B. Tungodden. 2010. Responsibility for what? Fairness and individual responsibility. European Economic Review 54: 429-441.
80. Schermer, Maartje. 2008. Enhancements, easy shortcuts, and the richness of human activities. Bioethics 22: 355-363. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.00657. x.
81. Parens, Erik. 2005. Authenticity and ambivalence. Hastings Center Report: 35:34-41.
82. Sandberg, Anders, and Nick Bostrom. 2006. Cognitive enhancement: a review of technology. EU ENHANCE Project. http://www.enhanceproject.org
83. Persson, Ingmar, and Julian Savulescu. 2012. Unfit for the future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
84. Elliott, Carl. 2004. Better than well: American medicine meets the American dream. New York: W. W. Norton.
85. Stiglitz, Joseph E. 2013. The price of inequality: How today's divided society endangers our future. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
86. McNamee, Stephen, and Robert K Miller. 2009. The meritocracy myth. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
87. Norton, M.I.; and D. Ariely. 2011. Building a better America-one wealth quintile at a time. Perspectives on Psychological Science 6: 9-12. doi: 10.1177/1745691610393524.
88. Harris, John. 2005. Enhancements are a moral obligation. WellcomeScience: 16-17.
89. Baumard, Nicolas, Jean-Baptiste Andre, and Dan Sperber. 2013. A mutualistic approach to morality: The evolution of fairness by partner choice. Behavioral and Brain Science 36: 59-78.
90. Kohlberg, Lawrence. 1969. Stage and sequence: The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In Handbook of socialization theory and research. ed. D.A. Goslin. Chicago: Rand-McNally.
91. Turiel, Elliot, 1983. The development of social knowledge: Morality and convention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
92. Haidt, J. 2001. The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review 108: 814-834.
93. Greene, J.D.; R.B. Sommerville, L.E. Nystrom, J.M. Darley, and J.D. Cohen. 2001. An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science 293: 2105-2108. doi: 10.1126/science.1062872.
94. Greene, Joshua D.; Leigh E. Nystrom, Andrew D. Engell, John M. Darley, and Jonathan D. Cohen. 2004. The neural bases of cognitive conflict and control in moral judgment. Neuron 44: 389-400. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2004.09.027.
95. Paxton, Joseph M.; Leo Ungar, and Joshua D. Greene. 2012. Reflection and reasoning in moral judgment. Cognitive Science 36: 163-177.
96. Jacobson, Daniel. 2013. Moral dumbfounding and moral stupefaction. In Oxford Studies in Normative Ethics, ed. M. Timmons, 2: 289-316. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
97. Haidt, Jonathan. 2013. The righteous mind. New York: Vintage Books.
98. Haidt, Jonathan, and Fredrik Bjorklund. 2008. Social intuitionists answer six questions about morality. In Moral Psychology, ed. W. Sinnott-Armstrong, 181-218. Cambridge: Bradford Books.
99. Haidt, Jonathan, Fredrik Bjorklund, and Scott Murphy. 2000. Moral dumbfounding: When intuition finds no reason. Unpublished manuscript, University of Virginia.
100. Bostrom, Nick, and Toby Ord. 2006. The reversal test: Eliminating status quo bias in applied ethics. Ethics 116: 656-679.
101. Nadler, Roland C.; and Peter B. Reiner. 2010. A call for data to inform discussion on cognitive enhancement. BioSocieties 5: 481-482. doi: 10.1057/biosoc.2010.30.
102. Nadler, R.; and P.B. Reiner. 2011. Prototypes or pragmatics? The open question of public attitudes toward enhancement. AJOB Neuroscience 2: 49-50. Taylor & Francis.
103. Guston, David H. 2004. Forget politicizing science. Let's democratize science! Issues in Science and Technology 28: 25-28.
104. Gupta, N.; A.R.H. Fischer, and L.J. Frewer. 2012. Socio-psychological determinants of public acceptance of technologies: A review. Public Understanding of Science 21: 782-795. doi: 10.1177/0963662510392485.
105. Erikson, Robert S, Gerald C Wright, and John P McIver. 1993. Statehouse democracy: Public opinion and policy in the American states. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
106. Levine, Michael E.; and Jennifer L. Forrence. 1990. Regulatory capture, public interest, and the public agenda: Toward a synthesis. Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization 6: 167-198. JSTOR.
107. Fischer, F. 2003. Reframing public policy: Discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
108. Burstein, Paul. 2003. The impact of public opinion on public policy: A review and an agenda. Political Research Quarterly 56: 29-40.
109. Kraft, Michael E, and Scott R Furlong. 2012. Public policy: Politics, analysis, and alternatives, 4th Edition. Los Angeles: CQ Press.
110. Kleiman, Mark A R, Jonathan P Caulkins, and Angela Hawken. 2011. Drugs and drug policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
111. DeSantis, Alan D.; Elizabeth M. Webb, and Seth M. Noar. 2008. Illicit use of prescription ADHD medications on a college campus: A multimethodological approach. Journal of American college health 57: 315-324. doi: 10.3200/JACH.57.3.315-324.
112. Outram, Simon M. 2010. The use of methylphenidate among students: The future of enhancement? Journal of Medical Ethics 36: 198-202.
113. Appel, J.M. 2008. When the boss turns pusher: A proposal for employee protections in the age of cosmetic neurology. Journal of Medical Ethics 34: 616-618. doi: 10.1136/jme.2007.022723.