Neuroethics

, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp 173–188

Public Attitudes Toward Cognitive Enhancement

  • Nicholas S. Fitz
  • Roland Nadler
  • Praveena Manogaran
  • Eugene W. J. Chong
  • Peter B. Reiner
Original Paper

DOI: 10.1007/s12152-013-9190-z

Cite this article as:
Fitz, N.S., Nadler, R., Manogaran, P. et al. Neuroethics (2014) 7: 173. doi:10.1007/s12152-013-9190-z

Abstract

Vigorous debate over the moral propriety of cognitive enhancement exists, but the views of the public have been largely absent from the discussion. To address this gap in our knowledge, four experiments were carried out with contrastive vignettes in order to obtain quantitative data on public attitudes towards cognitive enhancement. The data collected suggest that the public is sensitive to and capable of understanding the four cardinal concerns identified by neuroethicists, and tend to cautiously accept cognitive enhancement even as they recognize its potential perils. The public is biopolitically moderate, endorses both meritocratic principles and the intrinsic value of hard work, and appears to be sensitive to the salient moral issues raised in the debate. Taken together, these data suggest that public attitudes toward enhancement are sufficiently sophisticated to merit inclusion in policy deliberations, especially if we seek to align public sentiment and policy.

Keywords

Cognitive enhancementPublic attitudesFairnessAuthenticityExperimental neuroethicsRegulatory policyMoral psychology

Supplementary material

12152_2013_9190_MOESM1_ESM.docx (79 kb)
ESM 1(DOCX 78.5 kb)

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicholas S. Fitz
    • 1
  • Roland Nadler
    • 1
  • Praveena Manogaran
    • 1
  • Eugene W. J. Chong
    • 1
  • Peter B. Reiner
    • 1
  1. 1.National Core for Neuroethics, Department of Psychiatry and Brain Research CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada