The Rationale for Consuming Cognitive Enhancement Drugs in University Students and Teachers

Abstract

Cognitive enhancement (CE) is the pharmaceutical augmentation of mental abilities (e.g., learning or memory) without medical necessity. This topic has recently attracted widespread attention in scientific and social circles. However, knowledge regarding the mechanisms that underlie the decision to use CE medication is limited. To analyze these decisions, we used data from two online surveys of randomly sampled university teachers (N = 1,406) and students (N = 3,486). Each respondent evaluated one randomly selected vignette with regard to a hypothetical CE drug. We experimentally varied the characteristics of the drugs among vignettes and distributed them among respondents. In addition, the respondent’s internalization of social norms with respect to CE drug use was measured. Our results revealed that students were more willing to enhance cognitive performance via drugs than university teachers, although the overall willingness was low. The probability of side effects and their strength reduced the willingness to use CE drugs among students and university teachers, whereas higher likelihoods and magnitudes of CE increased this propensity. In addition, the internalized norm against CE drug use influenced decision making: Higher internalization decreased the willingness to use such medications. Students’ internalized norms more strongly affected CE abstinence compared with those of university teachers. Furthermore, internalized norms negatively interacted with the instrumental incentives for taking CE medication. This internalization limited the influence of and deliberation on instrumental incentives. This study is the first to provide empirical evidence regarding the importance of social norms and their influence on rational decision making with regard to CE. We identified previously undiscovered decision-making patterns concerning CE. Thus, this study provides insight into the motivators and inhibitors of CE drug use. These findings have implications for contending with CE behavior by highlighting the magnitude of potential side effects and by informing the debate regarding the ethics of CE use.

The Use of Cognitive Enhancers Among Medical Students

“…In particular, helping students to manage stress at a considerable level may be helpful by identifying less-harmful methods (26). The results of Sattler et al study showed that students tended to enhance their cognitive performance by drugs compared to university teachers; however, the overall willingness was low (27). The desired goal of CE medication use is to increase the cognitive performance by increasing concentration, increasing the time of the study, or increasing the working memory performance (28,29).…”

Evaluating the drivers of and obstacles to the willingness to use cognitive enhancement drugs: the influence of drug characteristics, social environment, and personal characteristics

“…[28,33], see the discussion section for limitations of this approach). We experimentally varied five characteristics (dimensions) of this drug (magnitude, probability of enhancement effect, severity, probability of side effects, and drug price), and three characteristics of the social environment (peer prevalence, social disapproval, and social suggestions; see Table  2).…”

Modelling predictors of UK undergraduates’ attitudes towards smart drugs

“…However, work in ADHD populations, including several randomised control trials, indicates that the psychostimulants are associated with relatively mild side effects such as a dry mouth [20,21]and reduced appetite but also more serious effects of increased in heart rate and blood pressure [21][22][23][24]. Comparative studies have found, perhaps unsurprisingly, that users are less concerned about the safety of smart drugs than non-users [6,25], and perceptions of the severity of possible health risks have been inversely associated with willingness to use smart drugs [26][27][28][29][30][31][32].…”