Abstract
With the rise of neuroethics as a research field of its own since the early 2000s, ethical questions concerning the neurosciences have become a major focus of bioethical debate. Yet, the neuroethical discourse has primarily focused on ethical, legal, and social implications of the products of neuroscience research such as clinical interventions and neuro-technologies. Ethical questions concerning the research process in neuroscience have, however, been largely neglected. While topics such as the ethics of test-person recruitment and informed consent procedures, ethics of data sharing and authorship, responsibility for dual use of research results, or the role of ethical review boards are to a large part coextensive with questions in research ethics in other areas of the life sciences, there are still a number of topics distinctive of neuroscience research ethics. These topics will be the focus of this chapter. We will review the debate on disclosure of incidental findings in neuroimaging, discuss the ambivalent role of neuroscience research for informing the ethical standards of animal testing, and finally turn to the debate about responsible research communication and interdisciplinary trespassing in a time of increased public interest in neuroscience research and imagination about its potential social and cultural consequences.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Anderson M, Anderson SL (2007) Machine ethics: creating an ethical intelligent agent. AI Mag 28(4):15–26. https://doi.org/10.1609/aimag.v28i4.2065
Beckoff M, Jamison D (eds) (1996) Readings in animal psychology. MIT Press, Cambridge
Bennett AJ, Ringach DL (2016) Animal research in neuroscience: a duty to engage. Neuron 92(3):653–657. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2016.10.034
Beuter A (2017) The use of neurocomputational models as alternatives to animal models in the development of electrical brain stimulation treatments. Altern Lab Anim: ATLA 45(2):91–99
Birnbacher D (1996) The great apes – why they have a right to life. Ethica Animali. Special issue devoted to the Great Ape Project:142–154
Blakemore C et al (2012) Implementing the 3Rs in neuroscience research: a reasoned approach. Neuron 75(6):948–950. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2012.09.001
Booth TC et al (2012) Management of incidental findings during imaging research in “healthy” volunteers: current UK practice. Br J Radiol 85(1009):11–21. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/73283917
Bovenkerk B, Kaldewaij F (2015) The use of animal models in behavioural neuroscience research. In: Lee G, Illes J, Ohl F (eds) Ethical issues in behavioral neuroscience, Current topics in behavioral neurosciences, vol 19. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 17–46
Braithwaite V (2010) Do fish feel pain? Oxford University Press, Oxford
Bunge S (2004) How we use rules to select actions: a review of evidence from cognitive neuroscience. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 4:564–579
Bunnik EM, Vernooij MW (2016) Incidental findings in population imaging revisited. Eur J Epidemiol 31(1):1–4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-016-0123-0
Bunnik EM et al (2017) Ethical framework for the detection, management and communication of incidental findings in imaging studies, building on an interview study of researchers’ practices and perspectives. BMC Med Ethics 18(1):10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-017-0168-y
Camerer CF, Loewenstein G, Prelec D (2004) Neuroeconomics: why economics needs brains. Scand J Econ 106(3):555–579. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0347-0520.2004.00377.x
Choudhury S (2010) Culturing the adolescent brain: what can neuroscience learn form anthropology? Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci 5(2–3):159–167
Choudhury S, Slaby J (2012) Critical neuroscience: a handbook of the social and cultural contexts of neuroscience. Wiley Blackwell, Chichester
Clarke S, Walsh A (2009) Scientific imperialism and the proper relations between the sciences. Int Stud Philos Sci 23(2):195–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/02698590903007170
Clarke S, Walsh A (2013) Imperialism, progress, developmental teleology, and interdisciplinary unification. Int Stud Philos Sci 27(3):341–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/02698595.2013.825493
Dawkins MS (2006) The scientific basis for assessing suffering in animals. In: Singer P (ed) In defense of animals: the second wave. Blackwell Publishing, Malden, pp 26–39
Deeke L, Kornhuber H (1978) An electrical sign of participation of the mesial ‘supplementary’ motor cortex in human voluntary finger movement. Brain Res 159(2):473–476
Donohue SE, Wendelken C, Bunge S (2008) Neural correlates of preparation for action selection as a function of specific task demands. J Cogn Neurosci 20(4):694–706
Dupré J (1995) Against scientific imperialism. In: Proceedings of the 1994 biennial meeting of the philosophy of science association, vol 2, pp 374–381
Emery NJ, Clayton NS (2004) The mentality of crows: convergent evolution of intelligence in corvids and apes. Science (New York, NY) 306(5703):1903–1907. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1098410
Erdmann P (2017) Incidental findings – ethical aspects. In: Weckbach S (ed) Incidental radiological findings, Diagnostic Imaging. Springer, Cham, pp 9–24
Exner C, Limbach C (2016) Animal experimentation in research, 10th edn. Available at: http://www.dfg.de/download/pdf/dfg_im_profil/geschaeftsstelle/publikationen/tierversuche_forschung_en.pdf
Ferdowsian H (2011) Human and animal research guidelines: aligning ethical constructs with new scientific developments. Bioethics 25(8):472–478. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2011.01923.x
Ferdowsian HR, Beck N (2011) Ethical and scientific considerations regarding animal testing and research. PLoS One 6(9):e24059. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0024059
Francione GL (2000) Introduction to animal rights. Temple University Press, Philadelphia
Fumagalli R (2018a) Against neuroscience imperialism. In: Mäki U, Walsh A, Fernández Pinto M (eds) Scientific imperialism: exploring the boundaries of interdisciplinarity, Routledge studies in science, technology and society. Routledge, London
Fumagalli R (2018b) Who is afraid of scientific imperialism? Synthese 195(9):4125–4146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1411-2
Gennaro RJ (2009) Animals, consciousness, and I-thoughts. In: Lurz RW (ed) The philosophy of animal minds. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 184–200
Gibson LM et al (2018) Impact of detecting potentially serious incidental findings during multi-modal imaging. Wellcome Open Res 2:114. https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.13181.3
Glimcher PW (2003) The neurobiology of visual-saccadic decision making. Annu Rev Neurosci 26:133–179
Glimcher PW (2010) Foundations of neuroeconomic analysis. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Glock H-J (2013) Mental capacities and animal ethics. In: Petrus K, Wild M (eds) Animal minds & animal ethics: connecting two separate fields, Human-animal studies, vol 3. Transcript, Berlin, pp 113–146
Gold JI, Shadlen MN (2007) The neural basis of decision making. Annu Rev Neurosci 30:535–574
Grady C (2015) Enduring and emerging challenges of informed consent. N Engl J Med 372(9):855–862. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1411250
Greene J, Cohen J (2004) For the law, neuroscience changes nothing and everything. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser B Biol Sci 359(1451):1775–1785. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2004.1546
Haggard P, Libet B (2001) Conscious intention and brain activity. J Conscious Stud 8:47–68
Hartmann M (2012) Against first nature. Critical theory and neuroscience. In: Choudhury S, Slaby J (eds) Critical neuroscience: a handbook of the social and cultural contexts of neuroscience. Wiley Blackwell, Chichester, pp 67–84
Hauser MD (1996) The evolution of communication. MIT Press, Cambridge
Haynes J-D (2011) Beyond Libet: Longterm predictions of free choice from neuroimaging signals. In: Sinnott-Armstrong W, Nadel L (eds) Conscious will and responsibility. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 85–96
Heinemann T, Hoppe C (2014) Incidental findings in neuroimaging research. Ethical considerations and a framework for ethical guidelines. In: Lanzerath D et al (eds) Incidental findings: Scientific, legal and ethical issues, Schriftenreihe der Hans-Neuffer-Stiftung, vol 26. Deutscher Ärzte Verlag, Köln, pp 59–71
Heinrichs B (2014) Incidental findings and the right not to know. In: Lanzerath D et al (eds) Incidental findings: scientific, legal and ethical issues, Schriftenreihe der Hans-Neuffer-Stiftung, vol 26. Deutscher Ärzte Verlag, Köln, pp 83–91
Hillix WA, Rumbaugh DM (2004) Animal bodies, human minds: ape, dolphin, and parrot language skills, Developments in primatology. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York
Holtzman GS (2018) Normative moral neuroscience: the third tradition of neuroethics. J Am Philos Assoc 127:1–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/apa.2018.25
Illes J et al (2004) Discovery and disclosure of incidental findings in neuroimaging research. J Magn Reson Imaging: JMRI 20(5):743–747. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.20180
Illes J et al (2006) Ethics. Incidental findings in brain imaging research: what should happen when a researcher sees a potential health problem in a brain scan from a research subject? Science (New York, NY) 311(5762):783–784. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1124665
Illes J et al (2010) Neurotalk: improving the communication of neuroscience research. Nat Rev Neurosci 11(1):61–69. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2773
Jahanshahi M et al (1995) Self-initiated versus externally triggered movements: I. An investigation using measurement of regional cerebral blood flow with PET and movement-related potentials in normal and Parkinson’s disease subjects. Brain 118(118):913–933
Jungert M (2017) Neurophilosophy or philosophy of neuroscience? What neuroscience and philosophy can and cannot do for each other. In: Leefmann J, Hildt E (eds) The human sciences after the decade of the brain. Academic/Elsevier, London, pp 3–13
Kant I (1785/2000) The metaphysics of morals. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Korsgaard C (2005) Fellow creatures. Kantian ethics and our duties to animals. Tanner Lect Hum Values 25:77–110
Korsgaard C (2011) Interacting with animals. A Kantian account. In: Beauchamp TL, Frey RG (eds) The Oxford handbook of animal ethics. Oxford University Press
Leefmann J, Lesle S (2018) Knowledge from scientific expert testimony without epistemic trust. Synthese 91(5):264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-018-01908-w
Leefmann J, Levallois C, Hildt E (2016) Neuroethics 1995–2012. A bibliometric analysis of the guiding themes of an emerging research field. Front Hum Neurosci 10:336. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00336
Leung L (2013) Incidental findings in neuroimaging: ethical and medicolegal considerations. Neurosci J 2013:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/439145
Libet B (1985) Unconscious cerebral initiative and the role of conscious will in voluntary action. Behav Brain Sci 8:529–566
Libet B et al (1983) Time of conscous intention to act in relation to onset of cerebral activity (readines potential): the unconscious initiation of a freely voluntary act. Brain 106:623–642
Lurz RW (ed) (2009) The philosophy of animal minds. Cambridge University Press. Available at:, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511819001
Mäki U (2013) Scientific imperialism: difficulties in definition, identification, and assessment. Int Stud Philos Sci 27(3):325–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/02698595.2013.825496
Malabou C (2008) What should we do with our brain? Perspectives in continental philosophy. Fordham University Press, New York. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/j.ctt1c5chvm
Maney DL (2015) Just like a circus: the public consumption of sex differences. Curr Top Behav Neurosci 19:279–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/7854_2014_339
Mele AR (2006) Free will and luck. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Metzinger T (2009) The ego tunnel: the science of the mind and the myth of the self. Basic Books, New York
Meynen G (2014) Neurolaw: neuroscience, ethics, and law. Review essay. Ethical Theory Moral Pract 17(4):819–829. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-014-9501-4
Miller FG, Mello MM, Joffe S (2008) Incidental findings in human subjects research: what do investigators owe research participants? J Law Med Ethics: J Am Soc Law Med Ethics 36(2):271–279. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-720X.2008.00269.x
Nelson L (1932) Vorlesungen über die Grundlagen der Ethik. Verlag Öffentliches Leben, Göttingen
Norton BG (1984) Environmental ethics and weak anthropocentrism. Environ Ethics 6(2):131–148. https://doi.org/10.5840/enviroethics19846233
O’Connell G et al (2011) The brain, the science and the media. The legal, corporate, social and security implications of neuroimaging and the impact of media coverage. EMBO Rep 12(7):630–636. https://doi.org/10.1038/embor.2011.115
O’Connor C, Rees G, Joffe H (2012) Neuroscience in the public sphere. Neuron 74(2):220–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2012.04.004
Ogbuka C (2014) Managing serious incidental findings in brain-imaging research: when consent for disclosure is declined. J Cogn Neuroethics 2:51–59
Orme NM et al (2010) Incidental findings in imaging research: evaluating incidence, benefit, and burden. Arch Intern Med 170(17):1525–1532. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2010.317
Panksepp J (2011) Cross-species affective neuroscience decoding of the primal affective experiences of humans and related animals. PLoS One 6(9):e21236. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021236
Pereboom D (2004) Is our conception of agent-causation coherent? Philos Top 32(1/2):275–286
Pitts-Taylor V (2010) The plastic brain: neoliberalism and the neuronal self. Health (London, England: 1997) 14(6):635–652. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363459309360796
Pykett J (2015) Brain culture: shaping policy through neuroscience. Policy Press, Bristol/Chicago. Available at: http://gbv.eblib.com/patron/FullRecord.aspx?p=2129487
Racine E, Bar-Ilan O, Illes J (2005) fMRI in the public eye. Nat Rev Neurosci 6(2):159–164. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1609
Racine E et al (2010) Contemporary neuroscience in the media. Soc Sci Med. (1982 71(4):725–733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.05.017
Racine E et al (2017) Media portrayal of a landmark neuroscience experiment on free will. Sci Eng Ethics 23(4):989–1007. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9845-3
Rancher CE et al (2016) Disclosing neuroimaging incidental findings: a qualitative thematic analysis of health literacy challenges. BMC Med Ethics 17(1):58. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-016-0141-1
Regan T (1983) The case for animal rights. University of California Press, Berkeley
Richardson HS (2008) Incidental findings and ancillary-care obligations. J Law Med Ethics: J Am Soc Law Med Ethics 36(2):256–211. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-720X.2008.00268.x
Ridderinkhof K et al (2004) The role of the medial frontal cortex in cognitive control. Science (New York, NY) 306(306):443–447
Rollin BE (2011) Animal pain. What it is and why it matters. J Ethics 15(4):425–437
Rollin MDH, Rollin BE (2014) Crazy like a fox. Validity and ethics of animal models of human psychiatric disease. Camb Q Healthcar Ethics: CQ: Int J Healthcar Ethics Committees 23(2):140–151. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180113000674
Rose NS, Abi-Rached JM (2013) Neuro: the new brain sciences and the management of the mind. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Roskies A (2002) Neuroethics for the new Millenium. Neuron 35(1):21–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(02)00763-8
Roskies A (2010) How does neuroscience affect our conception of volition? Annu Rev Neurosci 33:109–130
Russell WMS, Burch RL (1959) The principles of humane experimental technique. Methuen, London
Ryberg J (2014) Punishing adolescents—on immaturity and diminished responsibility. Neuroethics 7(3):327–336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-014-9203-6
Schaefer GO, Savulescu J (2018) The right to know: a revised standard for reporting incidental findings. Hast Cent Rep 48(2):22–32. https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.836
Schmidt CO et al (2013) Psychosocial consequences and severity of disclosed incidental findings from whole-body MRI in a general population study. Eur Radiol 23(5):1343–1351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2723-8
Schmücker R (2017) Incidental findings: definition of the concept. In: Weckbach S (ed) Incidental radiological findings, Diagnostic imaging. Springer, Cham, pp 3–7
Schuol S et al (2015) So rare we need to hunt for them: reframing the ethical debate on incidental findings. Genome Med 7(1):83. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13073-015-0198-3
Scurich N, Shniderman A (2014) The selective allure of neuroscientific explanations. PLoS One 9(9):e107529. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0107529
Shibaski H, Hallett M (2006) What is the Bereitschaftspotential? Clin Neurophysiol 117:2341–2356
Singer P (1995) Practical ethics, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Takashima K et al (2017) Discovery and informing research participants of incidental findings detected in brain magnetic resonance imaging studies: review and multi-institutional study. Brain Behavior 7(5):e00676. https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.676
The Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues (2013) Anticipate and communicate ethical management of incidental and secondary findings in the clinical, research, and direct-to-consumer contexts. Available at: https://bioethicsarchive.georgetown.edu/pcsbi/node/3183.html
Tomasello M (2008) Origins of human communication. MIT Press, Cambridge
Tomasello M, Rakoczy H (2003) What makes human cognition unique? Mind Lang 18:121–147
Torrance S (2008) Ethics and consciousness in artificial agents. AI & Soc 22(4):495–521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-007-0091-8
Vidal F (2018) What makes neuroethics possible? Hist Hum Sci 4(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/0952695118800410
Viera de Castro A, Olsson A (2015) Does the goal justify the methods? Harm and benefit in neuroscience research using animals. In: Lee G, Illes J, Ohl F (eds) Ethical issues in behavioral neuroscience, Current topics in behavioral neurosciences, vol 19. Springer, Heidelberg
Weckbach S (ed) (2017) Incidental radiological findings. Diagnostic imaging. Springer, Cham. Available at: https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/gbv/detail.action?docID=4855711
Wegner DM (2002) The illusion of conscious will, A Bradford book. MIT Press, Cambridge
Wolf SM (2011) Incidental findings in neuroscience research: a fundamental challenge to the structure of bioethics and health law. In: Illes J, Federico CA (eds) The Oxford handbook of neuroethics, Oxford library of psychology. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Wolf SM et al (2008) Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: analysis and recommendations. J Law Med Ethics 36(2):219–248. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-720X.2008.00266.x
Yeates JW (2012) Brain-pain: do animals with higher cognitive capacities feel more pain? Insights for species selection in scientific experiments. In: Hagen K, Schnieke AE, Thiele F (eds) Large animals as biomedical models: Ethical, societal, legal and biological aspects, Bad Neuenahr-Ahrweiler, pp 24–46
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this entry
Cite this entry
Leefmann, J., Jungert, M. (2019). Research Ethics and Scientific Integrity in Neuroscience. In: Iphofen, R. (eds) Handbook of Research Ethics and Scientific Integrity. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76040-7_44-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76040-7_44-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-76040-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-76040-7
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Religion and PhilosophyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Humanities