Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 32
Filter
1.
Sci Eng Ethics ; 30(4): 28, 2024 Jul 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39012561

ABSTRACT

The rapidly advancing field of brain-computer (BCI) and brain-to-brain interfaces (BBI) is stimulating interest across various sectors including medicine, entertainment, research, and military. The developers of large-scale brain-computer networks, sometimes dubbed 'Mindplexes' or 'Cloudminds', aim to enhance cognitive functions by distributing them across expansive networks. A key technical challenge is the efficient transmission and storage of information. One proposed solution is employing blockchain technology over Web 3.0 to create decentralised cognitive entities. This paper explores the potential of a decentralised web for coordinating large brain-computer constellations, and its associated benefits, focusing in particular on the conceptual and ethical challenges this innovation may pose pertaining to (1) Identity, (2) Sovereignty (encompassing Autonomy, Authenticity, and Ownership), (3) Responsibility and Accountability, and (4) Privacy, Safety, and Security. We suggest that while a decentralised web can address some concerns and mitigate certain risks, underlying ethical issues persist. Fundamental questions about entity definition within these networks, the distinctions between individuals and collectives, and responsibility distribution within and between networks, demand further exploration.


Subject(s)
Brain-Computer Interfaces , Internet , Personal Autonomy , Privacy , Humans , Brain-Computer Interfaces/ethics , Social Responsibility , Blockchain/ethics , Computer Security/ethics , Ownership/ethics , Politics , Cognition , Safety , Technology/ethics
2.
Chin Med Sci J ; 39(2): 131-139, 2024 Jun 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38862406

ABSTRACT

Brain-computer interface (BCI) technology is rapidly advancing in medical research and application. As an emerging biomedical engineering technology, it has garnered significant attention in the clinical research of brain disease diagnosis and treatment, neurological rehabilitation, and mental health. However, BCI also raises several challenges and ethical concerns in clinical research. In this article, the authors investigate and discuss three aspects of BCI in medicine and healthcare: the state of international ethical governance, multidimensional ethical challenges pertaining to BCI in clinical research, and suggestive concerns for ethical review. Despite the great potential of frontier BCI research and development in the field of medical care, the ethical challenges induced by itself and the complexities of clinical research and brain function have put forward new special fields for ethics in BCI. To ensure "responsible innovation" in BCI research in healthcare and medicine, the creation of an ethical global governance framework and system, along with special guidelines for cutting-edge BCI research in medicine, is suggested.


Subject(s)
Brain-Computer Interfaces , Humans , Biomedical Research/ethics , Brain-Computer Interfaces/ethics , Ethical Review
3.
Ann Biomed Eng ; 52(8): 1937-1939, 2024 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38602573

ABSTRACT

Neuralink is a neurotechnology company founded by Elon Musk in 2016, which has been quietly developing revolutionary technology allowing for ultra-high precision bidirectional communication between external devices and the brain. In this paper, we explore the multifaceted ethical considerations surrounding neural interfaces, analyzing potential societal impacts, risks, and call for a need for responsible innovation. Despite the technological, medical, medicolegal, and ethical challenges ahead, neural interface technology remains extremely promising and has the potential to create a new era of medicine.


Subject(s)
Brain-Computer Interfaces , Humans , Brain/physiology , Brain-Computer Interfaces/ethics
4.
PLoS One ; 15(7): e0235361, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32673326

ABSTRACT

Most people struggle to understand probability which is an issue for Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) researchers who need to communicate risks and uncertainties to the participants in their studies, the media and policy makers. Previous work showed that even the use of numerical values to express probabilities does not guarantee an accurate understanding by laypeople. We therefore investigate if words can be used to communicate probability, such as "likely" and "almost certainly not". We embedded these phrases in the context of the usage of autonomous vehicles. The results show that the association of phrases to percentages is not random and there is a preferred order of phrases. The association is, however, not as consistent as hoped for. Hence, it would be advisable to complement the use of words with numerical expression of uncertainty. This study provides an empirically verified list of probabilities phrases that HRI researchers can use to complement the numerical values.


Subject(s)
Brain-Computer Interfaces/trends , Robotics/trends , Brain-Computer Interfaces/ethics , Humans , Probability , Risk Factors , Robotics/ethics
5.
AJOB Neurosci ; 11(1): 46-58, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32009590

ABSTRACT

Technologies controlled directly by the brain are being developed, evolving based on insights gained from neuroscience, and rehabilitative medicine. Besides neuro-controlled prosthetics aimed at restoring function lost somehow, technologies controlled via brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) may also extend a user's horizon of action, freed from the need for bodily movement. Whilst BCI-mediated action ought to be, on the whole, treated as conventional action, law and policy ought to be amended to accommodate BCI action by broadening the definition of action as "willed bodily movement". Moreover, there are some dimensions of BCI mediated action that are significantly different to conventional cases. These relate to control. Specifically, to limits in both controllability of BCIs via neural states, and in foreseeability of outcomes from such actions. In some specific type of case, BCI-mediated action may be due to different ethical evaluation from conventional action.


Subject(s)
Brain-Computer Interfaces , Morals , Social Responsibility , Brain-Computer Interfaces/ethics , Humans , Psychomotor Performance , Social Behavior , Thinking
6.
Sci Eng Ethics ; 26(1): 351-367, 2020 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30868377

ABSTRACT

Ethical issues concerning brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) have already received a considerable amount of attention. However, one particular form of BCI has not received the attention that it deserves: Affective BCIs that allow for the detection and stimulation of affective states. This paper brings the ethical issues of affective BCIs in sharper focus. The paper briefly reviews recent applications of affective BCIs and considers ethical issues that arise from these applications. Ethical issues that affective BCIs share with other neurotechnologies are presented and ethical concerns that are specific to affective BCIs are identified and discussed.


Subject(s)
Affect/ethics , Brain-Computer Interfaces/ethics , Emotions/ethics , Bias , Decision Making , Humans , Informed Consent , Motivation , Personal Autonomy , Privacy
7.
AJOB Neurosci ; 10(4): 152-166, 2019.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31642755

ABSTRACT

The direct-to-consumer (DTC) neurotechnology market, which includes some brain-computer interfaces, neurostimulation devices, virtual reality systems, wearables, and smartphone apps is rapidly growing. Given this technology's intimate relationship with the brain, a number of ethical dimensions must be addressed so that the technology can achieve the goal of contributing to human flourishing. This paper identifies safety, transparency, privacy, epistemic appropriateness, existential authenticity, just distribution, and oversight as such dimensions. After an initial exploration of the relevant ethical foundations for DTC neurotechnologies, this paper lays out each dimension and uses examples to justify its inclusion.


Subject(s)
Brain-Computer Interfaces/ethics , Technology/ethics , Biomedical Technology , Codes of Ethics , Humans , Morals , Privacy
8.
Camb Q Healthc Ethics ; 28(4): 657-670, 2019 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31475659

ABSTRACT

Neuroprosthetic speech devices are an emerging technology that can offer the possibility of communication to those who are unable to speak. Patients with 'locked in syndrome,' aphasia, or other such pathologies can use covert speech-vividly imagining saying something without actual vocalization-to trigger neural controlled systems capable of synthesizing the speech they would have spoken, but for their impairment.We provide an analysis of the mechanisms and outputs involved in speech mediated by neuroprosthetic devices. This analysis provides a framework for accounting for the ethical significance of accuracy, control, and pragmatic dimensions of prosthesis-mediated speech. We first examine what it means for the output of the device to be accurate, drawing a distinction between technical accuracy on the one hand and semantic accuracy on the other. These are conceptual notions of accuracy.Both technical and semantic accuracy of the device will be necessary (but not yet sufficient) for the user to have sufficient control over the device. Sufficient control is an ethical consideration: we place high value on being able to express ourselves when we want and how we want. Sufficient control of a neural speech prosthesis requires that a speaker can reliably use their speech apparatus as they want to, and can expect their speech to authentically represent them. We draw a distinction between two relevant features which bear on the question of whether the user has sufficient control: voluntariness of the speech and the authenticity of the speech. These can come apart: the user might involuntarily produce an authentic output (perhaps revealing private thoughts) or might voluntarily produce an inauthentic output (e.g., when the output is not semantically accurate). Finally, we consider the role of the interlocutor in interpreting the content and purpose of the communication.These three ethical dimensions raise philosophical questions about the nature of speech, the level of control required for communicative accuracy, and the nature of 'accuracy' with respect to both natural and prosthesis-mediated speech.


Subject(s)
Communication Aids for Disabled/ethics , Communication Aids for Disabled/standards , Neural Prostheses , Speech, Alaryngeal , Brain-Computer Interfaces/ethics , Brain-Computer Interfaces/standards , Electroencephalography , Humans , Neural Prostheses/ethics , Semantics
9.
Rev. bioét. derecho ; (46): 29-46, jul. 2019. graf
Article in Spanish | IBECS | ID: ibc-184850

ABSTRACT

En este artículo, nos proponemos dos objetivos: el primero, describir la teoría clásica de la agencia intencional y cómo la neurotecnología de las interfaces cerebro-máquina desafía los requisitos de la teoría clásica de la agencia y de la consciencia corporal. La neurotecnología de las interfaces cerebro-máquina funciona implantando electrodos directamente en el área de la corteza motora del cerebro que controla el movimiento, y está diseñada para detectar las señales neuronales asociadas con la intención de moverse, que son después decodificadas por un algoritmo en un computador en tiempo real. Así, una persona podría pensar en mover su pierna o su brazo y la máquina recibiría la información de su pensamiento para traducir el pensamiento en acción, mediante prótesis internas o exoesqueletos. Esto es posible y sus aplicaciones se proyectan tanto sobre la rehabilitación de la funcionalidad motora, como sobre la posibilidad de mejoramiento (enhancement) de las capacidades humanas. Ambas aplicaciones dan lugar a numerosas implicaciones éticas, pero destacamos principalmente una, que denominamos: el problema ético de la agencia. El segundo objetivo del artículo es explorar brevemente la ética algorítmica en el contexto de las interfaces cerebro-máquina y cómo se entienden en este ámbito la autonomía, la responsabilidad y la privacidad informacional. Finalmente, abogamos por la necesidad de un marco ético de principios que regule la neurotecnología, y en tal sentido apelamos a los nuevos neuroderechos


The aim of this article is twofold: Firstly, we intend to describe the classical theory of intentional agency and to analyze how the neuro-technology of brain-machine interfaces (BCI) challenges the demands of that classical theory of agency and body consciousness. BCI neuro-technology works by implanting electrodes directly into the motor brain cortex that controls movement and detect neuronal signals associated with the intention to move, what is decoded by an algorithm on a computer in real time. Thus, someone could simply think about moving a leg or an arm and the tool (a prosthesis or exoskeleton) would receive the information to translate thought into action. This is yet feasible and its applications could involve rehabilitation of motor function and the possibility of enhancing human abilities. Both applications give rise to various several ethical implications but mainly to one that we call "the ethical problem of agency". Secondly, we briefly explore the ethics of algorithms in the context of BCI neuro-technology and the way autonomy, responsibility, and informational privacy are understood. Finally, we advocate the need for an ethical framework of principles governing neuro-technology, such as the new neuro-rights


En aquest article, ens proposem dos objectius: el primer, descriure la teoria clàssica de l'agència intencional i com la neurotecnologia de les interfícies cervell-màquina desafia els requisits de la teoria clàssica de l'agència i de la consciència corporal. La neurotecnologia de les interfícies cervell-màquina funciona implantant elèctrodes directament en l'àrea de l'escorça motora del cervell que controla el moviment, i està dissenyada per a detectar els senyals neuronals associades amb la intenció de moure's, que són després decodificades per un algoritme en un computador en temps real. Així, una persona podria pensar a moure la seva cama o el seu braç i la màquina rebria la informació del seu pensament per a traduir el pensament en acció, mitjançant pròtesis internes o exoesquelets. Això és possible i les seves aplicacions es projecten tant sobre la rehabilitació de la funcionalitat motora, com sobre la possibilitat de millorament (enhancement) de les capacitats humanes. Totes dues aplicacions donen lloc a nombroses implicacions ètiques, però destaquem principalment una, que denominem: el problema ètic de l'agència. El segon objectiu de l'article és explorar breument l'ètica algorítmica en el context de les interfícies cervell-màquina i com s'entenen en aquest àmbit l'autonomia, la responsabilitat i la privacitat informacional. Finalment, advoquem per la necessitat d'un marc ètic de principis que reguli la neurotecnologia, i en tal sentit apel·lem als nous neuro-drets


Subject(s)
Humans , Behavior Control/ethics , Thinking/ethics , Brain-Computer Interfaces/ethics , Artificial Intelligence , Electrodes , Brain-Computer Interfaces/classification , Neuroimaging/methods , Cerebrum/physiology , Cybernetics/trends
10.
BMC Med Ethics ; 20(1): 18, 2019 03 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30845952

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The rapid expansion of research on Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs) is not only due to the promising solutions offered for persons with physical impairments. There is also a heightened need for understanding BCIs due to the challenges regarding ethics presented by new technology, especially in its impact on the relationship between man and machine. Here we endeavor to present a scoping review of current studies in the field to gain insight into the complexity of BCI use. By examining studies related to BCIs that employ social research methods, we seek to demonstrate the multitude of approaches and concerns from various angles in considering the social and human impact of BCI technology. METHODS: For this scoping review of research on BCIs' social and ethical implications, we systematically analyzed six databases, encompassing the fields of medicine, psychology, and the social sciences, in order to identify empirical studies on BCIs. The search yielded 73 publications that employ quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods. RESULTS: Of the 73 publications, 71 studies address the user perspective. Some studies extend to consideration of other BCI stakeholders such as medical technology experts, caregivers, or health care professionals. The majority of the studies employ quantitative methods. Recurring themes across the studies examined were general user opinion towards BCI, central technical or social issues reported, requests/demands made by users of the technology, the potential/future of BCIs, and ethical aspects of BCIs. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that while technical aspects of BCIs such as usability or feasibility are being studied extensively, comparatively little in-depth research has been done on the self-image and self-experience of the BCI user. In general there is also a lack of focus or examination of the caregiver's perspective.


Subject(s)
Biomedical Research/ethics , Brain-Computer Interfaces/ethics , Brain-Computer Interfaces/psychology , Caregivers/psychology , Quality of Life/psychology , Caregivers/ethics , Communication Aids for Disabled , Electroencephalography , Ethics, Research , Humans , Personhood , User-Computer Interface
12.
Camb Q Healthc Ethics ; 27(4): 635-646, 2018 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30198466

ABSTRACT

Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) are driven essentially by algorithms; however, the ethical role of such algorithms has so far been neglected in the ethical assessment of BCIs. The goal of this article is therefore twofold: First, it aims to offer insights into whether (and how) the problems related to the ethics of BCIs (e.g., responsibility) can be better grasped with the help of already existing work on the ethics of algorithms. As a second goal, the article explores what kinds of solutions are available in that body of scholarship, and how these solutions relate to some of the ethical questions around BCIs. In short, the article asks what lessons can be learned about the ethics of BCIs from looking at the ethics of algorithms. To achieve these goals, the article proceeds as follows. First, a brief introduction into the algorithmic background of BCIs is given. Second, the debate about epistemic concerns and the ethics of algorithms is sketched. Finally, this debate is transferred to the ethics of BCIs.


Subject(s)
Algorithms , Bioethical Issues , Brain-Computer Interfaces/ethics , Humans , Neurosciences/ethics , Social Responsibility
13.
Camb Q Healthc Ethics ; 27(4): 660-674, 2018 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30198467

ABSTRACT

Brain-computer interface (BCI) is a promising technology for restoring communication in individuals with locked-in syndrome (LIS). BCI technology offers a potential tool for individuals with impaired or absent means of effective communication to use brain activity to control an output device such as a computer keyboard. Exploratory studies of BCI devices for communication in people with LIS are underway. Research with individuals with LIS presents not only technological challenges, but ethical challenges as well. Whereas recent attention has been focused on ethical issues that arise at the initiation of studies, such as how to obtain valid consent, relatively little attention has been given to issues at the conclusion of studies. BCI research in LIS highlights one such challenge: How to decide when an exploratory BCI research study should end. In this article, we present the case of an individual with presumed LIS enrolled in an exploratory BCI study. We consider whether two common ethical frameworks for stopping randomized clinical trials-equipoise and nonexploitation-can be usefully applied to elucidating researcher obligations to end exploratory BCI research. We argue that neither framework is a good fit for exploratory BCI research. Instead, we apply recent work on clinician-researcher fiduciary obligations and in turn offer some preliminary recommendations for BCI researchers on how to end exploratory BCI studies.


Subject(s)
Biomedical Research/ethics , Brain-Computer Interfaces/ethics , Informed Consent , Quadriplegia , Therapeutic Equipoise , Communication Aids for Disabled/ethics , Humans , Male , Quadriplegia/rehabilitation , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/ethics
15.
Camb Q Healthc Ethics ; 27(2): 316-325, 2018 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29509128

ABSTRACT

Neuroethics Now welcomes articles addressing the ethical application of neuroscience in research and patient care, as well as its impact on society.


Subject(s)
Attitude to Health , Brain-Computer Interfaces/ethics , Electric Stimulation Therapy/ethics , Personal Autonomy , Electrodes, Implanted , Humans , Neurosciences/ethics
16.
J Neural Eng ; 15(1): 013001, 2018 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28931749

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Sophisticated signal processing has opened the doors to more research with human subjects than ever before. The increase in the use of human subjects in research comes with a need for increased human subjects protections. APPROACH: We quantified the presence or absence of ethics language in published reports of brain-computer interface (BCI) studies that involved human subjects and qualitatively characterized ethics statements. MAIN RESULTS: Reports of BCI studies with human subjects that are published in neural engineering and engineering journals are anchored in the rationale of technological improvement. Ethics language is markedly absent, omitted from 31% of studies published in neural engineering journals and 59% of studies in biomedical engineering journals. SIGNIFICANCE: As the integration of technological tools with the capacities of the mind deepens, explicit attention to ethical issues will ensure that broad human benefit is embraced and not eclipsed by technological exclusiveness.


Subject(s)
Brain-Computer Interfaces/ethics , Informed Consent/ethics , Research Subjects , Humans
18.
BMC Med Ethics ; 18(1): 60, 2017 Nov 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29121942

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) is a set of technologies that are of increasing interest to researchers. BCI has been proposed as assistive technology for individuals who are non-communicative or paralyzed, such as those with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis or spinal cord injury. The technology has also been suggested for enhancement and entertainment uses, and there are companies currently marketing BCI devices for those purposes (e.g., gaming) as well as health-related purposes (e.g., communication). The unprecedented direct connection created by BCI between human brains and computer hardware raises various ethical, social, and legal challenges that merit further examination and discussion. METHODS: To identify and characterize the key issues associated with BCI use, we performed a scoping review of biomedical ethics literature, analyzing the ethics concerns cited across multiple disciplines, including philosophy and medicine. RESULTS: Based on this investigation, we report that BCI research and its potential translation to therapeutic intervention generate significant ethical, legal, and social concerns, notably with regards to personhood, stigma, autonomy, privacy, research ethics, safety, responsibility, and justice. Our review of the literature determined, furthermore, that while these issues have been enumerated extensively, few concrete recommendations have been expressed. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that future research should focus on remedying a lack of practical solutions to the ethical challenges of BCI, alongside the collection of empirical data on the perspectives of the public, BCI users, and BCI researchers.


Subject(s)
Biomedical Research/ethics , Brain-Computer Interfaces/ethics , Communication Aids for Disabled/ethics , Neurosciences/ethics , Neurosciences/trends , Brain Diseases/rehabilitation , Brain-Computer Interfaces/trends , Communication Aids for Disabled/trends , Electroencephalography , Ethics, Research , Humans , Personhood , User-Computer Interface
19.
Camb Q Healthc Ethics ; 26(4): 555-576, 2017 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28937339

ABSTRACT

Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) can enable communication for persons in severe paralysis including locked-in syndrome (LIS); that is, being unable to move or speak while aware. In cases of complete loss of muscle control, termed "complete locked-in syndrome," a BCI may be the only viable solution to restore communication. However, a widespread ignorance regarding quality of life in LIS, current BCIs, and their potential as an assistive technology for persons in LIS, needlessly causes a harmful situation for this cohort. In addition to their medical condition, these persons also face social barriers often perceived as more impairing than their physical condition. Through social exclusion, stigmatization, and frequently being underestimated in their abilities, these persons are being locked out in addition to being locked-in. In this article, we (1) show how persons in LIS are being locked out, including how key issues addressed in the existing literature on ethics, LIS, and BCIs for communication, such as autonomy, quality of life, and advance directives, may reinforce these confinements; (2) show how these practices violate the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and suggest that we have a moral responsibility to prevent and stop this exclusion; and (3) discuss the role of BCIs for communication as one means to this end and suggest that a novel approach to BCI research is necessary to acknowledge the moral responsibility toward the end users and avoid violating the human rights of persons in LIS.


Subject(s)
Brain-Computer Interfaces/ethics , Communication , Quadriplegia/psychology , Quality of Life , Social Isolation , Social Stigma , Disabled Persons , Human Rights , Humans
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...