| |
Neuroscience and Society
Page history last edited by Alison Boyce 1 yr ago
*Dumit, J. (2004). Picturing personhood: Brain scans and biomedical identity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Dumit explains how different 'actors' in the history of PET research come together to create meanings and significance in the images that PET produces. These images are not self-evidently meaningful, but require interpretation and the development of new ways of thinking about phenomena- what he calls this "learning to see" brain scans. The power of neuroimages in the media is derived from the perception that they are objective and scientific. Yet the numerous steps between the image acquisition and interpretation are left out of popular media presentations; the layers of meaning that have been assigned to an image overwhelm the caveats, qualifications, and tentative explanations of the results. Dumit finds a vast disconnect between the researchers’ nuanced and perhaps more accurate interpretations, and the public perception of neuroimages. Rather than viewing this as specific to PET, Dumit argues that this is the nature of imagery in science in general.
Farah, M. J. (2007). Editorial: Social, legal, and ethical implications of cognitive neuroscience: "neuroethics" for shortMIT Press.The author reflects on the social and ethical implications of cognitive neuroscience. According to the author, cognitive neuroscience is a branch of basic science that raises social, ethical, and legal concerns. It provides theories of mind-brain relations that might bring good or bad consequences to individuals and the society. It helps develop scientific information about the human brain and affects an individuals' thinking about human nature.; The author reflects on the social and ethical implications of cognitive neuroscience. According to the author, cognitive neuroscience is a branch of basic science that raises social, ethical, and legal concerns. It provides theories of mind-brain relations that might bring good or bad consequences to individuals and the society. It helps develop scientific information about the human brain and affects an individuals' thinking about human nature.
Farah, M. J., & Wolpe, P. R. (2004). Monitoring and manipulating brain function: New neuroscience technologies and their ethical implications. The Hastings Center Report, 34(3), 35. Congress christened the 1990s as the decade of the brain, where a great stride were made in both basic and clinical neuroscience, and this was apt from the vantage point of the early 21st Century. Farah and Wolpe explore the emerging social and ethical issues raised by progress in neuroscience.
Friedrich, M. J. (2005). Neuroscience becomes image conscious as brain scans raise ethical issues. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 294(7), 781-783. Discusses neuroscience and brain imaging techniques such as functional magnetic resonance imaging or fMRI to explore brain mechanisms. The issue of privacy concerning brain scan findings; Views of Martha Farah, director of the Center for Cognitive Neuroscience at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and others about the ethical implications of examining complex brain function; Idea that patients as well as physicians need to be educated in the technology; Neuroscientists' concern about how the data and anomalous results are interpreted; Views of Judy Illes, director of the neuroethics program at Stanford Center for Bioethics, Palo Alto, California.; Discusses neuroscience and brain imaging techniques such as functional magnetic resonance imaging or fMRI to explore brain mechanisms. The issue of privacy concerning brain scan findings; Views of Martha Farah, director of the Center for Cognitive Neuroscience at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and others about the ethical implications of examining complex brain function; Idea that patients as well as physicians need to be educated in the technology; Neuroscientists' concern about how the data and anomalous results are interpreted; Views of Judy Illes, director of the neuroethics program at Stanford Center for Bioethics, Palo Alto, California.
Glannon, W. (2006). Neuroethics. Bioethics, 20(1), 37-52. Neuroimaging, psychosurgery, deep-brain stimulation, and psychopharmacology hold considerable promise for more accurate prediction and diagnosis and more effective treatment of neurological and psychiatric disorders. Some forms of psychopharmacology may even be able to enhance normal cognitive and affective capacities. But the brain remains the most complex and least understood of all the organs in the human body. Mapping the neural correlates of the mind through brain scans, and altering these correlates through surgery, stimulation, or pharmacological interventions can affect us in both positive and negative ways. We need to carefully weigh the potential benefit against the potential harm of such techniques. This paper examines some of these techniques and explores the emerging ethical issues in clinical neuroscience.
Greely, H. (2007). On neuroethics. Science, 318(5850), 533.
*Hutson, M. (2007, December 9, 2007). Neurorealism. [Electronic version]. The New York Times. This article discusses Eric Racine et al.’s coinage of the term ‘neurorealism’, which refers to the tendency in the media to treat evidence from neuroimaging studies as more ‘real’ than other types of evidence, even when the conclusions of these studies seem outrageous or the study design itself is flawed. The idea is that presenting audiences with brain scans makes almost any statement more credible, and almost any phenomenon more ‘real’. A good example of this is the article below, also in the Times, that claims that neuroimaging studies help to show that hysteria is ‘real’.
Illes, J., & Racine, E. (2005). Neuroethics: Dialogue on a continuum from tradition to innovation. American Journal of Bioethics, 5(2), W3-W4.
Comments on the neuroimaging technologies and its association with the ethics of neuroscience. Fundamental task of neuroethics; Possible consequences of modern visualization techniques; Implications of neuroimaging for the real-world setting.; Comments on the neuroimaging technologies and its association with the ethics of neuroscience. Fundamental task of neuroethics; Possible consequences of modern visualization techniques; Implications of neuroimaging for the real-world setting.
*Illes, J. (Ed.). (2006). Neuroethics: Defining the issues in theory, practice, and policy. New York: Oxford University Press. This is a collection of essays by leaders in neuroethics discussing some of the arising issues in cognitive science, law, education, moral theory, etc. as new brain technologies become more prominent. Neuroimaging, transcranial magnetic stimulation, and functional neurosurgery are just a few of the relevant techniques discussed. This book is a good introduction to the wide variety of ethical concerns about responsibility and self that new technology brings, and also lays out the direction of future scholarship in neuroethics.
Illes, J., & Bird, S. J. (2006). Neuroethics: A modern context for ethics in neuroscience. Trends in Neurosciences, 29(9), 511-517. Neuroethics, a recently modernized field at the intersection of bioethics and neuroscience, is founded on centuries of discussion of the ethical issues associated with mind and behavior. Broadly defined, neuroethics is concerned with ethical, legal and social policy implications of neuroscience, and with aspects of neuroscience research itself. Advances in neuroscience increasingly challenge long-held views of the self and the individual’s relationship to society. Neuroscience also has led to innovations in clinical medicine that have not only therapeutic but also non-therapeutic dimensions that extend well beyond previously charted boundaries. The exponential increase in cross-disciplinary research, the commercialization of cognitive neuroscience, the impetus for training in ethics, and the increased attention being paid to public understanding of science all illuminate the important role of neuroethics in neuroscience.
Illes, J., De Vries, R., Cho, M. K., & Schraedley-Desmond, P. (2006). ELSI priorities for brain imaging. American Journal of Bioethics, 6(2), W24-W31. As one of the most compelling technologies for imaging the brain, functional MRI (fMRI) produces measurements and persuasive pictures of research subjects making cognitive judgments and even reasoning through difficult moral decisions. Even after centuries of studying the link between brain and behavior, this capability presents a number of novel significant questions. For example, what are the implications of biologizing human experience? How might neuroimaging disrupt the mysteries of human nature, spirituality, and personal identity? Rather than waiting for an ethical agenda to emerge from some unpredictable combination of the concerns of ethicists and researchers, the attention of journalists, or after controversy is sparked by research that cannot be retracted, we queried key figures in bioethics and the humanities, neuroscience, media, industry, and patient advocacy in focus groups and interviews. We identified specific ethical, legal and social issues (ELSI) that highlight researcher obligations and the nonclinical impact of the technology at this new frontier. ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR Copyright of American Journal of Bioethics is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts)
Illes, J., Gallo, M., & Kirschen, M. P. (2006). An ethics perspective on transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and human neuromodulation. Behavioural Neurology, 17(3/4), 149-157.
This paper concerns the ethics of human neuromodulation using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). We examine the challenges of modulating the brain with TMS through the research ethics lens and in clinical medicine for treating frank pathology, primarily in psychiatric diseases. We also consider contemporary issues raised in the neuroethics literature about managing unexpected findings, and relate these to TMS and to other frontier neurotechnology that is becoming openly available in the public domain. We argue that safety and informed consent are of paramount importance for TMS, but that personal values and sociocultural factors must also be considered when examining the promise of this technology and applications that ought to be highlighted for extra precautions. ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR Copyright of Behavioural Neurology is the property of IOS Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts)
Illes, J., & Raffin, T. A. (2002). Neuroethics: An emerging new discipline in the study of brain and cognitionThe vision for the special issue in Brain and Cognition is rooted in the need to bring to the foreground the state of scientific knowledge in research and clinical neuroimaging ethics. To this end, the issue highlights a broad range of relatively unexplored ethical challenges in functional neuroimaging with MR, alone or in combination with other neuroimaging modalities, from imaging the central nervous system of the fetus in utero through neural activation patterns associated with cognition and behavior in childhood and in adulthood. Theoretical, practical, and ethical considerations at the heart of imaging healthy research subjects and cognitively compromised patients are explored. Copyright 2002 Elsevier Copyright of Brain & Cognition is the property of Academic Press Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts);
*Joyce, K. (2005). Appealing images: Magnetic resonance imaging and the production of authoritative knowledge. Social Studies of Science, 35(3), 437-462. Kelly Joyce’s anthropological work on imaging reveals the entanglement of facts and values in ‘objective’ scientific research. Joyce uses an ethnographic approach to critically examine the practices, and especially the language, of MRI technologists, physicians, and popular narratives. She finds that MRI images do depend, at every step of the way, upon choices made by humans, and is not the ideally mechanized procedure used to represent what exists, like a photograph. On the contrary, these images require a great deal of knowledge and interpretation, which becomes clear upon examination of the errors that can occur in interpreting MRI images. This is masked in the portrayals of MRI as self-evident.
Social and political-economic forces weigh heavily upon these practices and “produce” these images. She examines the rhetoric and subtleties of MRI discourse, and traces the historical meanings and authority of the image in science and the media. The clinical relevance of this history has become clear, in the declining status of the clinical examination, which seems “primitive” in comparison to the information thought to be provided from MRI. Such examinations have been presumed to be subject to greater influence by idiosyncratic interpretation compared to MRI images, a presumption she challenges by detailing the behind-the-scenes work that must be done in constructing these images.
Slice thickness, field of view, number of slices, and many other choices must be made in constructing images, leading Joyce to refer to them as “contingent” or “situated” in time and place, in that these “these choices…hold consequences for what the image looks like” (447). There must be “tacit knowledge” on the part of those interpreting images, to discern artifacts from the “real”, and hence health from disease. Like Dumit (2003) she discusses the learning process that occurs for radiologists in training. One cannot just view an image, but through a collective “professional vision” one can “learn to order the world in a particular way” (449).
Kinetz, E. (2006, September 26, 2006). Is hysteria real? brain images say yes. [Electronic version]. The New York Times
Levy, Neil. Rethinking Neuroethics in Light of the Extended Mind Thesis. American Journal of Bioethics, Sep2007, 7(9): 3-11.The extended mind thesis is the claim that mental states extend beyond the skulls of the agents whose states they are. This seemingly obscure and bizarre claim has far-reaching implications for neuroethics, I argue. In the first half of this article, I sketch the extended mind thesis and defend it against criticisms. In the second half, I turn to its neuroethical implications. I argue that the extended mind thesis entails the falsity of the claim that interventions into the brain are especially problematic just because they are internal interventions, but that many objections to such interventions rely, at least in part, on this claim. Further, I argue that the thesis alters the focus of neuroethics, away from the question of whether we ought to allow interventions into the mind, and toward the question of which interventions we ought to allow and under what conditions. The extended mind thesis dramatically expands the scope of neuroethics: because interventions into the environment of agents can count as interventions into their minds, decisions concerning such interventions become questions for neuroethics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Meegan, Daniel V. Neuroimaging Techniques for Memory Detection: Scientific, Ethical, and Legal Issues. American Journal of Bioethics, Jan2008, 8(1): 9-20. There is considerable interest in the use of neuroimaging techniques for forensic purposes. Memory detection techniques, including the well-publicized Brain Fingerprinting technique (Brain Fingerprinting Laboratories, Inc., Seattle WA), exploit the fact that the brain responds differently to sensory stimuli to which it has been exposed before. When a stimulus is specifically associated with a crime, the resulting brain activity should differentiate between someone who was present at the crime and someone who was not. This article reviews the scientific literature on three such techniques: priming, old/new, and P300 effects. The forensic potential of these techniques is evaluated based on four criteria: specificity, automaticity, encoding flexibility, and longevity. This article concludes that none of the techniques are devoid of forensic potential, although much research is yet to be done. Ethical issues, including rights to privacy and against self-incrimination, are discussed. A discussion of legal issues concludes that current memory detection techniques do not yet meet United States standards of legal admissibility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Moll, J., Zahn, R., De Oliveira-Souza, R., Krueger, F., & Grafman, J. (2005). The neural basis of human moral cognition. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6(10), 799-809.
Moral cognitive neuroscience is an emerging field of research that focuses on the neural basis of uniquely human forms of social cognition and behaviour. Recent functional imaging and clinical evidence indicates that a remarkably consistent network of brain regions is involved in moral cognition. These findings are fostering new interpretations of social behavioural impairments in patients with brain dysfunction, and require new approaches to enable us to understand the complex links between individuals and society. Here, we propose a cognitive neuroscience view of how cultural and context-dependent knowledge, semantic social knowledge and motivational states can be integrated to explain complex aspects of human moral cognition. ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR Copyright of Nature Reviews Neuroscience is the property of Nature Publishing Group and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts)
President's Council on Bioethics. (2004). Neuroscience, brain, and behavior IV: Brain imaging (case study) (council discussion). Retrieved December 30, 2007, 2007, from http://www.bioethics.gov/transcripts/june04/session5.html This is just one of a series of discussions between members of the Council, made up of philosophers, physicians, and policy-makers, about the broad ethical issues in neuroimaging as viewed by the leaders of the relevant fields. One might think that such a discussion would tend toward the practical and focus on policy-making, but it is rather abstract and philosophical, and very interesting.
Racine, E., Bar-Ilan, O., & Illes, J. (2005). Science and society: FMRI in the public eye. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6(2), 159-164. The wide dissemination and expanding applications of functional MRI have not escaped the attention of the media or discussion in the wider public arena. From the bench to the bedside, this technology has introduced substantial ethical challenges. Are the boundaries of what it can and cannot achieve being communicated to the public? Are its limitations understood? And given the complexities that are inherent to neuroscience, are current avenues for communication adequate? ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR Copyright of Nature Reviews Neuroscience is the property of Nature Publishing Group and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts);
Racine, E., Bar-Ilan, O., & Illes, J. (2006). Brain imaging: A decade of coverage in the print media. Science Communication, 28(1), 122-143. Advances in neuroscience are increasingly intersecting with issues of ethical, legal, and social interest. This study is an analysis of press coverage of an advanced technology for brain imaging, functional magnetic resonance imaging, that has gained significant public visibility over the past ten years. Discussion of issues of scientific validity and interpretation dominated over ethical content in both the popular and specialized press. Coverage of research on higher order cognitive phenomena specifically attributed broad personal and societal meaning to neuroimages. The authors conclude that neuroscience provides an ideal model for exploring science communication and ethics in a multicultural context. ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR Copyright of Science Communication is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts);
Racine, E., & Illes, J. (2006). Neuroethical responsibilities. Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences, 33(3), 269-277. Neuroscience represents a dynamic area of biomedical research where neuroethical responsibilities for researchers are emerging. This paper is the companion piece to the French-language one also published in this issue of the Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences. It serves as a review of recent advances in neuroethics through the lens of three cases: (1) incidental finding of anomalies in neuroimaging research; (2) creation of neurotechnologies that can lead to cognitive enhancement, and (3) responsible communication of research results. We propose and discuss a multidimensional framework of neuroethical responsibilities to help tackle these issues. The framework reiterates the fundamental role of scientific integrity, puts in the foreground social responsibilities pertaining to the eventual use of neuroscience knowledge, and highlights self-reflection in research and training of researchers. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved)
Racine, E., & Illes, J. (2007). Emerging ethical challenges in advanced neuroimaging research: Review, recommendations and research agenda. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 2(2), 1-10. The dynamic and ever-evolving nature of neuroimaging research creates important ethical challenges. New domains of neuroscience research and improving technological capabilities in neuroimaging have expanded the scope of studies that probe the biology of the social and ethical brain, the range of eligible volunteers for research, and the extent of academic-industry relationships. Accordingly, challenges in informed consent and subject protection are surfacing. In this context, we provide an overview of the current landscape for neuroimaging and discuss specific research ethics topics arising from it. We suggest preliminary approaches to tackle current issues, and identify areas for further collaboration between neuroimagers and institutional review boards (research ethics committee). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved)
Singh, J., Hallmayer, J., & Illes, J. (2007). Interacting and paradoxical forces in neuroscience and society. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 8(2), 153-160. Discoveries in the field of neuroscience are a natural source of discourse among scientists and have long been disseminated to the public. Historically, as news of findings has travelled between communities, it has elicited both expected and unusual reactions. What scientific landmarks promote discourse within the professional community? Do the same findings achieve a place in the public eye? How does the media choose what is newsworthy, and why does the public react the way it does? Drawing on examples of past challenges at the crossroads of neuroscience and society and on a case study of trends in one neurogenetic disease, autism, we explore the dialectical forces interacting in scientific and public discourse. ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR Copyright of Nature Reviews Neuroscience is the property of Nature Publishing Group and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts)
Neuroscience and Society
|
|
Tip: To turn text into a link, highlight the text, then click on a page or file from the list above.
|
|
|
|
|
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.