Cognitive Enhancement: Treating or Cheating?

Whetstine, Leslie M.

doi:10.1016/j.spen.2015.05.003

Cited by 12 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, the trade-off between side effects and improvements may be less clear if healthy individuals use pharmaceutical enhancers to improve their mental performance (Hall 2004). Crucially, and in opposition to the argument advanced by Sandberg and Bostrom above, some scholars observe that "more" may not always be "better" in terms of memory or attentiveness as unanticipated problems could arise (Whetstine 2015). Altering the selective process of memory could have associated effects whereby gains in one area may lead to diminishments in another area (ibid).…”

Section: Risk and Efficacymentioning

confidence: 97%

Evaluating Ethical Frameworks for the Assessment of Human Cognitive Enhancement Applications

Forsberg¹,

Shelley-Egan²,

Thorstensen³

et al. 2017

SpringerBriefs in Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human cognitive enhancement (HCE) is a term that signifies applications that are supposed to improve cognitive capacities, such as attention, memory or reasoning. A polarised debate concerning the ethical issues of enhancement has emerged between the champions and opponents of HCE. Taking both this debate and increased feasibility of some applications of HCE into account, it is clear that that those involved in ethical debate on human cognitive enhancement need to find a middleground between addressing those issues already here or just on the horizon and those issues that tend to be driven by speculation, hype or abstract philosophical concepts. The aim of this book is to make a reasoned argument for a sound ethical framework that might be used by decision makers to ethically assess HCE. We will focus on ethical frameworks for assessment of specific applications (or generic groups of applications) with a clear decision making focus, for instance, related to decisions as to whether or not to buy, market or to allow marketing of such applications. Appropriate frameworks should facilitate ethical decision making in practice, be usable for non-philosophers and related to evidence that can (at least in principle) be produced in the short or medium term.

show abstract

Section: Risk and Efficacymentioning

confidence: 97%

Evaluating Ethical Frameworks for the Assessment of Human Cognitive Enhancement Applications

Forsberg¹,

Shelley-Egan²,

Thorstensen³

et al. 2017

SpringerBriefs in Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cognitive enhancement has received increasing attention by the scientific community in the last decades, raising the issue of whether the use of cognitive enhancing drugs should be regarded as a form of academic misconduct [7,[20][21][22][23][24]. For instance, the President's Council on Bioethics has compared CE to plagiarism, stating that a performance influenced by the use of stimulants is "less one's own and less worthy of our admiration", hence implying that enhancing cognition is cheating [24].…”

Section: Cognitive Enhancement: a New Form Of Academic Misconduct?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive Enhancement vs. Plagiarism: a Quantitative Study on the Attitudes of an Italian Sample

Palamenghi

Bonfiglioli

2019

Neuroethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Irrespective of the presence of formal norms, behaviours such as plagiarism, data fabrication and falsification are commonly regarded as unethical and unfair. Almost unanimously, they are considered forms of academic misconduct. Is this the case also for newer behaviours that technology is making possible and are now entering the academic scenario?In the current paper we focus on cognitive enhancement (CE), the use of drugs to enhance cognitive skills of an otherwise healthy individual. At present, there are no formal rules forbidding its use in the academic setting. However, it is not clear whether there is a general public sentiment that CE should be considered as a modern form of academic misconduct.By means of the Contrastive Vignette Technique, we collected quantitative data from 284 online surveys to directly compare the attitude of the general public towards CE and plagiarism across different ethically relevant aspects. Our aim was to understand whether the use of prescription drugs to enhance a healthy person's cognitive skills is perceived similarly to a more common form of cheating, specifically plagiarism.Results show that our participants do not endorse CE. At the same time, however, their opinion on the ethical issues related to its use is not negative: rather, their attitude is more positive towards CE compared to plagiarism. This seems to pose against the idea that, at present, the use of cognitive enhancers in academic environments is regarded as a form of cheating.

show abstract

“…Issues of fairness and personal achievement centre on whether the use of cognitive enhancers can be considered as cheating, extending an unfair advantage in particular competitive contexts such as college and school examinations (Cakic 2009;Sahakian and Morein-Zamir 2011). The idea of taking cognitive enhancers to concentrate or to stay awake for longer in order to meet a deadline or to study for an examination is perceived by some as unfair and inauthentic, undermining the hard work of those who do not take enhancers but pursue the effort naturally (Whetstine 2015). Related concerns revolve around whether achievements facilitated through the use of PCEs are devalued in some way because they do not entail sufficient personal sacrifice and perseverance (Maslen, Faulmüller, and Savulescu 2014;Whetstine 2015).…”

Section: Pharmaceutical Cognitive Enhancers: Ethical Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Responsible Research and Innovation in the context of human cognitive enhancement: some essential features

Shelley-Egan

Hanssen

Landeweerd

et al. 2017

Journal of Responsible Innovation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human cognitive enhancement (HCE) is an area in which nontherapeutic enhancements have been widely debated. Some applications are already on the market and available for home use (e.g. non-invasive brain stimulation devices), while other forms of enhancement such as 'smart drugs' or pharmacological enhancers are readily available (albeit 'off-label' or illegally obtained). Private and public interest in HCE may well intensify as the field engages with broader societal trends such as an increasingly competitive work-life and greater demands for productivity, in addition to increased interest in cognitive enhancement more generally. There is thus a need for some dedicated and timely consideration of the area, particularly with regard to governance issues. Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) offers one possible approach that aims to anticipate and reflect on potential implications and societal expectations with respect to research and innovation. This article takes up current work on the HCENAT (Naturalness in Human Cognitive Enhancement) project and offers some essential features of RRI for HCE.

show abstract

Cognitive Enhancement: Treating or Cheating?

Cited by 12 publications

References 18 publications

Evaluating Ethical Frameworks for the Assessment of Human Cognitive Enhancement Applications

Evaluating Ethical Frameworks for the Assessment of Human Cognitive Enhancement Applications

Cognitive Enhancement vs. Plagiarism: a Quantitative Study on the Attitudes of an Italian Sample

Responsible Research and Innovation in the context of human cognitive enhancement: some essential features

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About