Cookies?
Library Header Image
LSE Research Online LSE Library Services

Bottom up ethics - neuroenhancement in education and employment

Bard, Imre ORCID: 0000-0001-6395-0335, Gaskell, George, Allansdottir, Agnes, da Cunha, Rui Vieira, Eduard, Peter, Hampel, Juergen, Hildt, Elisabeth, Hofmaier, Christian, Kronberger, Nicole, Laursen, Sheena, Meijknecht, Anna, Nordal, Salvör, Quintanilha, Alexandre, Revuelta, Gema, Saladié, Núria, Sándor, Judit, Santos, Júlio Borlido, Seyringer, Simone, Singh, Ilina, Somsen, Han, Toonders, Winnie, Torgersen, Helge, Torre, Vincent, Varju, Márton and Zwart, Hub (2018) Bottom up ethics - neuroenhancement in education and employment. Neuroethics. ISSN 1874-5490

[img]
Preview
Text - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (484kB) | Preview

Identification Number: 10.1007/s12152-018-9366-7

Abstract

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.

Item Type: Article
Official URL: https://link.springer.com/journal/12152
Additional Information: © 2018 The Authors © CC BY 4.0
Divisions: Methodology
Subjects: L Education > L Education (General)
Q Science > Q Science (General)
T Technology > T Technology (General)
Sets: Departments > Methodology
Date Deposited: 11 Jun 2018 08:14
Last Modified: 05 Mar 2019 15:54
URI: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/88282

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics