Abstract
This paper argues that many ethical issues in neuroeducational research cannot be appropriately addressed using the principles and guidance available in one of these areas alone, or by applying these in simple combination. Instead, interdisciplinary and public dialogue will be required to develop appropriate normative principles. In developing this argument, it examines neuroscientific and educational perspectives within three broad categories of ethical issue arising at the interface of cognitive neuroscience and education: issues regarding the carrying out of interdisciplinary research, the scrutiny and communication of findings and concepts, and the application of research and associated issues of policy likely to arise in the future. To help highlight the need for interdisciplinary and public discussion, we also report the opinions of a group of educators (comprising trainee teachers, teachers and head teachers) on the neuroeducational ethics of cognitive enhancing drugs, infant screening, genetic profiling and animal research.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Here, all observations and measurements of behaviour, including that collected in the laboratory, are classified as essentially social in nature, since even pressing buttons must be interpreted in the context of the instructions provided by the experimenter.
References
Cantlon, J.F., E.M. Brannon, E.J. Carter, and K.A. Pelphrey. 2006. Functional imaging of numerical processing in adults and 4-y-old children. [Article]. Plos Biology 4(5): 844–854.
Wilson, A.J., S. Dehaene, O. Dubois, and M. Fayol. 2009. Effects of an adaptive game intervention on accessing number sense in low-socioeconomic-status kindergarten children. Mind, Brain, and Education 3(4): 224–234.
Shaywitz, B.A., S.E. Shaywitz, B.A. Blachman, K.R. Pugh, R.K. Fullbright, P. Skudlarski, et al. 2004. Development of left occipitotemporal systems for skilled reading in children after a phonologically-based intervention. Biological Psychiatry 55(9): 926–933.
Simos, P.G., J.M. Fletcher, E. Bergman, J.I. Breier, B.R. Foorman, E.M. Castillo, et al. 2002. Dyslexia-specific brain activation profile becomes normal following successful remedial training. Neurology 58(8): 1203–1213.
Temple, E., G. Deutsch, R.A. Poldrack, S.L. Miller, P. Tallal, and M.M. Merzenich. 2003. Neural deficits in children with dyslexia ameliorated by behavioral remediation: Evidence from functional fMRI. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 100: 2860–2865.
Hillman, C.H., K.I. Erickson, and A.F. Framer. 2008. Be smart, exercise your heart: Exercise effects on brain and cognition. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 9: 58–65.
Blakemore, S.J. 2008. The social brain in adolescence. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 9: 267–277.
Blakemore, S.J., and U. Frith. 2005. The learning brain. Oxford: Blackwell.
de Jong, T., T. van Gog, K. Jenks, S. Manlove, J. van Hell, J. Jolles, et al. 2009. Explorations in learning and the brain: On the potential of cognitive neuroscience for educational science. New York: Springer.
Goswami, U. 2004. Neuroscience and education. British Journal of Educational Psychology 74: 1–14.
Fenton, K.D., and P.A. Howard-Jones. 2011. Educators’ views on ethical issues at the interface of neuroscience and education—an exploratory survey. University of Bristol. Available on http://www.bristol.ac.uk/education/people/academicStaff/edpahj.
Howard-Jones, P.A. 2010. Introducing neuroeducational research. Abingdon: Routledge.
Howard-Jones, P.A., S. Demetriou, R. Bogacz, J.H. Yoo, and U. Leonards. 2011. Toward a science of learning games. Mind, Brain and Education 5(1), 33–41.
Howard-Jones, P.A., and S. Demetriou. 2009. Uncertainty and engagement with learning games. Instructional Science 37(6): 519–536.
Howard-Jones, P.A., R. Bogacz, J.H. Yoo, U. Leonards, and S. Demetriou. 2010. The neural mechanisms of learning from competitors. Neuroimage 53(2): 790–799.
Shellock, F.G., and J.V. Crues. 2004. MR procedures: Biologic effects, safety, and patient care. Radiology 232(3): 635–652.
BERA. 2004. Revised ethical guidelines for educational research (2004).
Illes, J., A.C. Rosen, L. Huang, R.A. Goldstein, T.A. Raffin, G. Swan, et al. 2004. Ethical consideration of incidental findings on adult brain MRI in research. [Article]. Neurology 62(6): 888–890.
Wolf, S.M., F.P. Lawrenz, C.A. Nelson, J.P. Kahn, M.K. Cho, E.W. Clayton, et al. 2007, May. Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: Analysis and recommendations. Paper presented at the Symposium on Findings in Human Subjects Research—From Imaging to Genomics, Minneapolis, MN.
BPS. 2006. Code of ethics and conduct.
AERA. 2000. Ethical standards of the American educational research association.
Leshner, A.I. 2005. It’s time to go public with neuroethics. [Editorial Material]. American Journal of Bioethics 5(2): 1–2.
Draganski, B., C. Gaser, V. Busch, G. Schuierer, U. Bogdahn, and A. May. 2004. Changes in grey matter induced by training. Nature 427: 311–312.
Paus, T. 2008. Mapping brain maturation and development of social cognition during adolescence. London: Government Office for Science.
Lerner, R.M. 2005. Promoting positive youth development: Theoretical and empirical bases. Washington DC: National Research Council/Institute of Medicine.
Taylor, C., and S. Gorrard. 2004. Combining methods in educational and social research. McGraw-Hill International.
Jensen, P.S., L.E. Arnold, J.E. Richters, J.B. Severe, D. Vereen, B. Vitiello, et al. 1999. A 14-month randomized clinical trial of treatment strategies for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. [Article]. Archives of General Psychiatry 56(12): 1073–1086.
Coch, D. 2007. Neuroimaging research with children: Ethical issues and case scenarios. Journal of Moral Education 36(1): 1–18.
Downie, J., and J. Marshall. 2007. Pediatric neuroimaging ethics. [Article]. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 16(2): 147–160.
Kim, B.S., J. Illes, R.T. Kaplan, A. Reiss, and W. Scott. 2002. Incidental findings on pediatric MR images of the brain. [Article]. American Journal of Neuroradiology 23(10): 1674–1677.
Downie, J., M. Schmidt, N. Kenny, R. D’Arcy, M. Hadskis, and J. Marshall. 2007. Paediatric MRI research ethics: The priority issues. [Review]. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 4(2): 85–91.
Lundy, L. 2007. ‘Voice’ is not enough: Conceptualising Article 12 of the United Nations convention on the rights of the child. [Article]. British Educational Research Journal 33(6): 927–942.
Coghlan, A. 2004, 27 January. Cambridge’s primate reseacrh centre axed. New Scientist. Retrieved from http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4605-cambridges-primate-research-centre-axed.html.
Hagelin, J., H.-E. Carlsson, and J. Hau. 2003. An overview of surveys on how people view animal experimentation: Some factors that may influence the outcome. Public Understanding of Science 12: 67–81.
Baluch, B., and B. Kaur. 1995. Attitude change toward animal experimentation in an academic setting. Journal of Psychology 129(4): 477–479.
Lang, C. 2010. Science, education, and the ideology of “how”. Mind, Brain and Education 4(2): 49–52.
Pickering, S.J., and P.A. Howard-Jones. 2007. Educators’ views on the role of neuroscience in education: Findings from a study of UK and international perspectives. Mind, Brain and Education 1(3): 109–113.
Morse, S.J. 2006. Brain overclaim syndrome and criminal responsibility: A diagnostic note. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law 3: 397–412.
Horton, J. 2006, 13th November. Stroppy teenagers can blame the brain. Edinburgh Evening News. Retrieved from http://living.scotsman.com/features/Stroppy-teenagers-can-blame-the.2826624.jp.
Mills, D. (Writer). 2005. The dyslexia myth. In D. Mills (Producer), Dispatches. UK: Channel 4.
Nicolson, R. 2005. Dyslexia: Beyond the myth. The Psychologist 18(11): 658–659.
Howard-Jones, P.A. 2009. Scepticism is not enough discussion. Cortex 45(4): 550–551.
Sheridan, K., E. Zinchenko, and H. Gardner. 2006. Neuroethics in education. In Neuroethics: Defining the issues in theory, practice and policy, ed. J. Illes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Farah, M.J. 2002. Emerging ethical issues in neuroscience. [Article]. Nature Neuroscience 5(11): 1123–1129.
McCabe, S.E., J.R. Knight, C.J. Teter, and H. Wechser. 2005. Non-medical use of prescription stimulants among US college students: Prevalence and correlates from a national survey. [Article]. Addiction 100(1): 96–106.
DeSantis, A.D., E.M. Webb, and S.M. Noar. 2008. Illicit use of prescription ADHD medications on a college campus: A multimethodological approach. [Article]. Journal of American College Health 56(3): 315–323.
Roman, G.C., and S.J. Rogers. 2004. Donepezil: A clinical review of current and emerging indications. [Review]. Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy 5(1): 161–180.
Gron, G., M. Kirstein, A. Thielscher, M.W. Riepe, and M. Spitzer. 2005. Cholinergic enhancement of episodic memory in healthy young adults. Psychopharmacology 182(1): 170–179.
Gazzaniga, M.S. 2005. Smarter on drugs. Scientific American: Mind 16: 32–37.
Greely, H., B. Sahakian, J. Harris, R.C. Kessler, M.S. Gazzaniga, P. Campbell, et al. 2008. Towards responsible use of cognitive-enhancing drugs by the healthy. Nature 456: 702–705.
Horn, G. 2008. Brain science, addiction and drugs. London: Academy of Medical Sciences.
Jones, R., K. Morris, and D. Nutt. 2005. Drugs futures 2025? Foresight: Brain science, addiction and drugs state of science review. London: Office of Science and Technology, Department of Trade and Industry (UK).
Molfese, D.L. 2000. Predicting dyslexia at 8 years of age using neonatal brain responses. Brain and Language 72: 238–245.
Guttorm, T.K., P.H.T. Leppanen, A.-M. Poikeus, K.M. Eklund, P. Lyytinen, and H. Lyytinen. 2005. Brain event-related potentials (ERPs) measured at birth predict later language development in children with and without familial risk for dyslexia. Cortex 41:291–303.
Friedrich, M. 2008. Early neural markers of language learning difficulty in German. London: Government Office for Science.
Szucs, D., F. Soltesz, E. Jarmi, and V. Csepe. 2007. The speed of magnitude processing and executive functions in controlled and automatic number comparison in children: An electro-encephalography study. [Article]. Behavioral and Brain Functions 3: 20.
Goswami, U. 2008. Neuroscience in education. London: Government Office for Science.
Plomin, R. 2008. Genetics and the future diagnosis of learning disabilities. London: Government Office for Science.
Stein, Z. 2010. On the difference between designing children and raising them: Ethics and the use of educationally oriented biotechnology. Mind, Brain and Education 4(2): 53–67.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix A
Appendix A
Results of a survey of educators (N = 100) who were asked to express their agreement on statements relating to the neuroeducational ethics of cognitive enhancing drugs, infant screening, genetic profiling and animal research
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Howard-Jones, P.A., Fenton, K.D. The Need for Interdisciplinary Dialogue in Developing Ethical Approaches to Neuroeducational Research. Neuroethics 5, 119–134 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-011-9101-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-011-9101-0