Opin vísindi

Bottom Up Ethics - Neuroenhancement in Education and Employment

Bottom Up Ethics - Neuroenhancement in Education and Employment

Title: Bottom Up Ethics - Neuroenhancement in Education and Employment
Author: Bard, Imre
Gaskell, George
Allansdottir, Agnes
da Cunha, Rui Vieira
Eduard, Peter
Hampel, Juergen
Hildt, Elisabeth
Hofmaier, Christian
Kronberger, Nicole
Laursen, Sheena
... 15 more authors Show all authors
Date: 2018-05-01
Language: English
Scope: 309-322
University/Institute: Háskóli Íslands (HÍ)
University of Iceland (UI)
Department: Siðfræðistofnun (HÍ)
Centre for Ethics (UI)
Series: Neuroethics;11(3)
ISSN: 1874-5490
1874-5504 (eISSN)
DOI: 10.1007/s12152-018-9366-7
Subject: Empirical ethics; Neuroenhancement; Social values; Lífsiðfræði; Siðfræði; Taugakerfi
URI: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11815/1449

Show full item record


Bard, I., Gaskell, G., Allansdottir, A. et al. Bottom Up Ethics - Neuroenhancement in Education and Employment. Neuroethics 11, 309–322 (2018) doi:10.1007/s12152-018-9366-7


Neuroenhancement involves the use of neurotechnologies to improve cognitive, affective or behavioural functioning, where these are not judged to be clinically impaired. Questions about enhancement have become one of the key topics of neuroethics over the past decade. The current study draws on in-depth public engagement activities in ten European countries giving a bottom-up perspective on the ethics and desirability of enhancement. This informed the design of an online contrastive vignette experiment that was administered to representative samples of 1000 respondents in the ten countries and the United States. The experiment investigated how the gender of the protagonist, his or her level of performance, the efficacy of the enhancer and the mode of enhancement affected support for neuroenhancement in both educational and employment contexts. Of these, higher efficacy and lower performance were found to increase willingness to support enhancement. A series of commonly articulated claims about the individual and societal dimensions of neuroenhancement were derived from the public engagement activities. Underlying these claims, multivariate analysis identified two social values. The Societal/Protective highlights counter normative consequences and opposes the use enhancers. The Individual/Proactionary highlights opportunities and supports use. For most respondents these values are not mutually exclusive. This suggests that for many neuroenhancement is viewed simultaneously as a source of both promise and concern.


Publisher's version (útgefin grein)


Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)