Do Publics Share Experts’ Concerns about Brain–Computer Interfaces? A Trinational Survey on the Ethics of Neural Technology

Sample M, Sattler S, Blain-Moraes S, Rodríguez-Arias D, Racine E (2020)
Science, Technology, & Human Values 45(6): 1242-1270.

Zeitschriftenaufsatz | Veröffentlicht | Englisch
 
Download
Es wurden keine Dateien hochgeladen. Nur Publikationsnachweis!
Autor*in
Sample, Matthew; Sattler, SebastianUniBi ; Blain-Moraes, Stefanie; Rodríguez-Arias, David; Racine, Eric
Abstract / Bemerkung
Since the 1960s, scientists, engineers, and healthcare professionals have developed brain–computer interface (BCI) technologies, connecting the user’s brain activity to communication or motor devices. This new technology has also captured the imagination of publics, industry, and ethicists. Academic ethics has highlighted the ethical challenges of BCIs, although these conclusions often rely on speculative or conceptual methods rather than empirical evidence or public engagement. From a social science or empirical ethics perspective, this tendency could be considered problematic and even technocratic because of its disconnect from publics. In response, our trinational survey (Germany, Canada, and Spain) reports public attitudes toward BCIs ( N = 1,403) on ethical issues that were carefully derived from academic ethics literature. The results show moderately high levels of concern toward agent-related issues (e.g., changing the user’s self) and consequence-related issues (e.g., new forms of hacking). Both facets of concern were higher among respondents who reported as female or as religious, while education, age, own and peer disability, and country of residence were associated with either agent-related or consequence-related concerns. These findings provide a first look at BCI attitudes across three national contexts, suggesting that the language and content of academic BCI ethics may resonate with some publics and their values.
Erscheinungsjahr
2020
Zeitschriftentitel
Science, Technology, & Human Values
Band
45
Ausgabe
6
Seite(n)
1242-1270
ISSN
0162-2439
eISSN
1552-8251
Page URI
https://pub.uni-bielefeld.de/record/2958158

Zitieren

Sample M, Sattler S, Blain-Moraes S, Rodríguez-Arias D, Racine E. Do Publics Share Experts’ Concerns about Brain–Computer Interfaces? A Trinational Survey on the Ethics of Neural Technology. Science, Technology, & Human Values. 2020;45(6):1242-1270.
Sample, M., Sattler, S., Blain-Moraes, S., Rodríguez-Arias, D., & Racine, E. (2020). Do Publics Share Experts’ Concerns about Brain–Computer Interfaces? A Trinational Survey on the Ethics of Neural Technology. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 45(6), 1242-1270. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243919879220
Sample, M., Sattler, S., Blain-Moraes, S., Rodríguez-Arias, D., and Racine, E. (2020). Do Publics Share Experts’ Concerns about Brain–Computer Interfaces? A Trinational Survey on the Ethics of Neural Technology. Science, Technology, & Human Values 45, 1242-1270.
Sample, M., et al., 2020. Do Publics Share Experts’ Concerns about Brain–Computer Interfaces? A Trinational Survey on the Ethics of Neural Technology. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 45(6), p 1242-1270.
M. Sample, et al., “Do Publics Share Experts’ Concerns about Brain–Computer Interfaces? A Trinational Survey on the Ethics of Neural Technology”, Science, Technology, & Human Values, vol. 45, 2020, pp. 1242-1270.
Sample, M., Sattler, S., Blain-Moraes, S., Rodríguez-Arias, D., Racine, E.: Do Publics Share Experts’ Concerns about Brain–Computer Interfaces? A Trinational Survey on the Ethics of Neural Technology. Science, Technology, & Human Values. 45, 1242-1270 (2020).
Sample, Matthew, Sattler, Sebastian, Blain-Moraes, Stefanie, Rodríguez-Arias, David, and Racine, Eric. “Do Publics Share Experts’ Concerns about Brain–Computer Interfaces? A Trinational Survey on the Ethics of Neural Technology”. Science, Technology, & Human Values 45.6 (2020): 1242-1270.

Export

Markieren/ Markierung löschen
Markierte Publikationen

Open Data PUB

Web of Science

Dieser Datensatz im Web of Science®

Suchen in

Google Scholar