Advertisement

Neuroenhancement at Work: Addressing the Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications

  • Veljko DubljevićEmail author
  • Iris Coates McCall
  • Judy Illes
Chapter
  • 70 Downloads
Part of the Advances in Neuroethics book series (AIN)

Abstract

Neuroenhancement is associated with a wide range of existing, emerging, and future biomedical technologies that are intended to improve human cognitive performance and mitigate—if not reverse—human error. Neuroenhancement in classrooms, universities, and the military has been discussed at length, but the workplace has been largely omitted from the conversation until now. By providing examples from branches of the commercial market that are rarely linked with cognitive enhancement in the literature, we argue that neuroenhancement at work is likely to become a major challenge in the labor market. Therefore, we focus here on the specific application of neuroenhancements to the workplace. Central issues involve both drugs and devices, some of which are well-trodden ethical concerns while others are novel challenges. We conclude with a brief discussion and outline of a discourage-use policy that has the potential to mitigate the challenges of neuroenhancement at work.

Keywords

Neuroenhancement at work Neuroethics 

Notes

Acknowledgements

VD is supported by the Faculty Research and Professional Development program at NC State University. This project was also supported in part by Technical Safety BC, Vancouver, Canada (ICM and JI) and Neuroethics Canada. JI is Canada Research Chair in Neuroethics. Special thanks go to Abigail Scheper for her help with language editing and formatting.

References

  1. Academy of Medical Sciences. Human enhancement and the future of work. In: Joint report of the Academy of Medical Sciences, the British Academy, the Royal Academy of Engineering and the Royal Society. 2012. http://royalsociety.org/upload-edFiles/Royal_Society_Content/policy/projects/human-enhancement/2012-11-06-Human-enhancement.pdf. Accessed 10 Nov 2012.
  2. Angius L, Mauger AR, Hopker J, Pascual-Leone A, Santarnecchi E, Marcora SM. Bilateral extracephalic transcranial direct current stimulation improves endurance performance in healthy individuals. Brain Stimul. 2018;11(1):108–17.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Appel JM. When the boss turns pusher: a proposal for employee protections in the age of cosmetic neurology. J Med Ethics. 2008;34(8):616–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Ball K. Workplace surveillance: an overview. Labor Hist. 2010;51(1):87–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berka C, Levendowski DJ, Lumicao MN, Yau A, Davis G, Zivkovic VT, Olmstead RE, Tremoulet PD, Craven PL. EEG correlates of task engagement and mental workload in vigilance, learning, and memory tasks. Aviat Space Environ Med. 2007;78(5):B231–44.Google Scholar
  6. Berlim MT, Van den Eynde F, Daskalakis ZJ. Clinically meaningful efficacy and acceptability of low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for treating primary major depression: a meta-analysis of randomized, double-blind and sham-controlled trials. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2013;38(4):543.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Bliss TV, Collingridge GL, Morris RG. Introduction. Long-term potentiation and structure of the issue. Philos Trans R Soc B. 2003;358(1432):607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. British Medical Association. Boosting your brainpower: ethical aspects of cognitive enhancements. A discussion paper from the British Medical Association. London: BMA; 2007.Google Scholar
  9. Caidwell Jr JA, Smythe III NK, Caidwell J, Hall KK, Norman DN. The effects of modafinil on aviator performance during 40 hours of continuous wakefulness: a UH-60 helicopter simulator study. Army Aeromedical Research Unit Fort Rucker Al; 1999. Report No.: 99-17.Google Scholar
  10. Clark VP, Coffman BA, Mayer AR, Weisend MP, Lane TD, Calhoun VD, Raybourn EM, Garcia CM, Wassermann EM. TDCS guided using fMRI significantly accelerates learning to identify concealed objects. NeuroImage. 2012;59(1):117–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Coates McCall I, Illes J. Owning ethical innovation: claims about commercial brain wearable technologies. International Neuroethics Society Annual Meeting. 2018. Abstract submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  12. Dodge T, Williams KJ, Marzell M, Turrisi R. Judging cheaters: is substance misuse viewed similarly in the athletic and academic domains? Psychol Addict Behav. 2012;26(3):678–82.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dubljević V. Principles of justice as the basis for public policy on psychopharmacological cognitive enhancement. Law Innov Technol. 2012a;4(1):67–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dubljević V. Toward a legitimate public policy on cognition-enhancement drugs. AJOB Neurosci. 2012b;3(3):29–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dubljević V. Prohibition or coffee shops: regulation of amphetamine and methylphenidate for enhancement use by healthy adults. Am J Bioeth. 2013a;13(7):23–33.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2013.794875.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Dubljević V. Cognitive enhancement, rational choice and justification. Neuroethics. 2013b;6(1):179–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dubljević V. Neurostimulation devices for cognitive enhancement: toward a comprehensive regulatory framework. Neuroethics. 2015a;8(2):115–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dubljević V. Cognitive enhancement: a glance at the future and ethical considerations. In: Knafo S, Venero C, editors. Cognitive enhancement. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2015b. p. 343–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dubljević V. Enhancement with modafinil: benefiting or harming the society? In: Jotterand F, Dubljević V, editors. Cognitive enhancement: ethical and policy implications in international perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press; 2016. p. 259–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dubljević V, Racine E. Moral enhancement meets normative and empirical reality: assessing the practical feasibility of moral enhancement neurotechnologies. Bioethics. 2017;31(5):338–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dubljević V, Ryan CJ. Cognitive enhancement with methylphenidate and modafinil: conceptual advances and societal implications. Neurosci Neuroecon. 2015;4:25–33.  https://doi.org/10.2147/NAN.S61925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dubljević V, Sattler S, Racine E. Cognitive enhancement and academic misconduct: a study exploring their frequency and relationship. Ethics Behav. 2014;24(5):408–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Enriquez-Geppert S, Huster RJ, Herrmann CS. EEG-neurofeedback as a tool to modulate cognition and behavior: a review tutorial. Front Hum Neurosci. 2017;11:51.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Estrada A, Kelley AM, Webb CM, Athy JR, Crowley JS. Modafinil as a replacement for dextroamphetamine for sustaining alertness in military helicopter pilots. Aviat Space Environ Med. 2012;83(6):556–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Faulmüller N, Malsen H, Savulescu J. Pharmacological cognitive enhancement—how neuroscientific research could advance ethical debate. Front Syst Neurosci. 2014;8:1–12.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fnsys.2014.00107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fitz NS, Reiner PB. The challenge of crafting policy for do-it-yourself brain stimulation. J Med Ethics. 2013;41:410–2.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fregni F, Boggio PS, Nitsche M, Bermpohl F, Antal A, Feredoes E, Marcolin MA, Rigonatti SP, Silva MT, Paulus W, Pascual-Leone A. Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation of prefrontal cortex enhances working memory. Exp Brain Res. 2005;166(1):23–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gersner R, Oberman L, Sanchez MJ, Chiriboga N, Kaye HL, Pascual-Leone A, Libenson M, Roth Y, Zangen A, Rotenberg A. H-coil repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment of temporal lobe epilepsy: a case report. Epilepsy Behav Case Rep. 2016;5:52–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Groppa S, Oliviero A, Eisen A, Quartarone A, Cohen LG, Mall V, Kaelin-Lang A, Mima T, Rossi SE, Thickbroom GW, Rossini PM. A practical guide to diagnostic transcranial magnetic stimulation: report of an IFCN committee. Clin Neurophysiol. 2012;123(5):858–82.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Grosbras MH, Paus T. Transcranial magnetic stimulation of the human frontal eye field: effects on visual perception and attention. J Cogn Neurosci. 2002;14(7):1109–20.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Grosbras MH, Paus T. Transcranial magnetic stimulation of the human frontal eye field facilitates visual awareness. Eur J Neurosci. 2003;18(11):3121–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. Horvath JC, Forte JD, Carter O. Quantitative review finds no evidence of cognitive effects in healthy populations from single-session transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). Brain Stimul. 2015a;8(3):535–50.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Horvath JC, Forte JD, Carter O. Evidence that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) generates little-to-no reliable neurophysiologic effect beyond MEP amplitude modulation in healthy human subjects: a systematic review. Neuropsychologia. 2015b;66:213–36.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. Illes J. Not forgetting. Am J Bioeth. 2007;7(9):3–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Illieva I, Boland J, Farah MJ. Objective and subjective cognitive enhancing effects of mixed amphetamine salts in healthy people. Neuropharmacology. 2013;64:496–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kuo MF, Nitsche MA. Effects of transcranial electrical stimulation on cognition. Clin EEG Neurosci. 2012;43(3):192–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. Luber B, Lisanby SH. Enhancement of human cognitive performance using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). NeuroImage. 2014;85:961–70.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. Markets and Markets. Brain monitoring market by product (MRI, CT, PET, EEG, EMG, MEG, TCD, ICP, Electrodes, Sensors, Gels, Cables), procedure (invasive, non-invasive), disease (TBI, stroke, dementia, epilepsy) & end user (hospital, clinic, ASC, ambulance)—forecasts to 2021. 2017. https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/brain-monitoring-devices-market-909.html?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIiPqg1e7l2wIVBGt-Ch1jYQewEAAYASAAEgLf6_D_BwE. Accessed 21 Jun 2018.
  39. Marron EM, Viejo-Sobera R, Palaus M, Boixadós M, Valero-Cabre A, Redolar-Ripoll D. P237 Modulating executive functions and working memory performance on clinical neuropsychological tasks with theta burst transcranial magnetic stimulation. Clin Neurophysiol. 2017;128(3):e130–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Martin DM, McClintock SM, Forster JJ, Lo TY, Loo CK. Cognitive enhancing effects of rTMS administered to the prefrontal cortex in patients with depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual task effects. Depress Anxiety. 2017;34(11):1029–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Medical Bureau of Roadside Safety. Report on roadside drug testing and equipment and related matters. Dublin: Medical Bureau of Roadside Safety; 2012.Google Scholar
  42. Medina J, Cason S. No evidential value in samples of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) studies of cognition and working memory in healthy populations. Cortex. 2017;94:131–41.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Miler JA, Meron D, Baldwin DS, Garner M. The effect of prefrontal transcranial direct current stimulation on attention network function in healthy volunteers. Neuromodulation. 2017;21(4):355–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Millán JR, Renkens F, Mourino J, Gerstner W. Noninvasive brain-actuated control of a mobile robot by human EEG. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2004 Jun;51(6):1026–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. NISSAN MOTOR Co., Ltd. Brain-to-Vehicle [Internet]. NISSAN|CORPORATE INFORMATION|Outline of Company TOP. [cited 2018 May 16]. Available from https://www.nissan-global.com/EN/TECHNOLOGY/OVERVIEW/b2v.html.
  46. Nitsche MA, Paulus W. Excitability changes induced in the human motor cortex by weak transcranial direct current stimulation. J Physiol. 2000;527(3):633–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Partridge B, Lucke J, Hall W. A comparison of attitudes toward cognitive enhancement and legalized doping in sport in a community sample of Australian adults. Am J Bioeth Primary Res. 2012;3(4):81–6.Google Scholar
  48. Pettey C. Wearables hold the key to connected health monitoring [Internet]. Gartner.com. 2018 [cited 2018 Oct 11]. Available from https://www.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/wearables-hold-the-key-to-connected-health-monitoring/
  49. Polanía R, Nitsche MA, Paulus W. Modulating functional connectivity patterns and topological functional organization of the human brain with transcranial direct current stimulation. Hum Brain Mapp. 2011;32(8):1236–49.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. Racine E, Forlini C. Expectations regarding cognitive enhancement create substantial challenges. J Med Ethics. 2009;35(8):469–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ranisch R, Garofoli D, Dubljević V. ‘Clock shock’, motivational enhancement and performance maintenance in adderall use. AJOB Neurosci. 2013;4(1):13–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rawls J. The idea of public reason revisited. Univ Chic Law Rev. 1997;64(3):765–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Repantis D, Schlattmann P, Laisney O, Heuser I. Modafinil and methylphenidate for neuroenhancement in healthy individuals: a systematic review. Pharmacol Res. 2010;62:187–206.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Roads and Track Authority [RTA]. Roadside drug testing. Sydney: New South Wales Centre for Road Safety. 2009. http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/heavyvehicles/downloads/hv_drug_testing_dl1.html. Accessed 2 May 2013.
  55. Rutherford G, Lithgow B, Moussavi Z. Short and long-term effects of rTMS treatment on Alzheimer’s disease at different stages: a pilot study. J Exp Neurosci. 2015;9:JEN-S24004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Science and Technology Options Assessment [STOA]. Human enhancement study. The Hague: Rathenau Institute; 2009.Google Scholar
  57. Sharwood LN, Elkington J, Meuleners L, Ivers R, Boufous S, Stevenson M. Use of caffeinated substances and risk of crashes in long distance drivers of commercial vehicles: case-control study. BMJ. 2013;346:f1140.  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f1140.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. SmartCap Technologies. SmartCap Technologies|Measure Alertness. Eliminate Fatigue [Internet]. SmartCapTech. [cited 2018 Jun 11]. Available from https://www.smartcaptech.com/
  59. Snyder A. Explaining and inducing savant skills: privileged access to lower level, less-processed information. Philos Trans R Soc B 2009;364(1522):1399–405. Accessed 11 Apr 2013.Google Scholar
  60. Snyder A, Bahramali H, Hawker T, Mitchell DJ. Savant-like numerosity skills revealed in normal people by magnetic pulses. Perception. 2006;35(6):837–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Steenbergen L, Sellaro R, Hommel B, Lindenberger U, Kühn S, Colzato LS. “Unfocus” on foc. us: commercial tDCS headset impairs working memory. Exp Brain Res. 2016;234(3):637–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Takabi H, Bhalotiya A, Alohaly M. Brain computer interface (BCI) applications: privacy threats and countermeasures. In Collaboration and Internet Computing (CIC), 2016 IEEE 2nd International Conference. 2016 Nov 1. IEEE. p. 102–11.Google Scholar
  63. Teo F, Hoy KE, Daskalakis ZJ, Fitzgerald PB. Investigating the role of current strength in tDCS modulation of working memory performance in healthy controls. Front Psychiatry. 2011;2:45.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Teplan M. Fundamental of EEG measurement. Meas Sci Rev. 2002;2(2):1–11.Google Scholar
  65. Töpper R, Mottaghy FM, Brügmann M, Noth J, Huber W. Facilitation of picture naming by focal transcranial magnetic stimulation of Wernicke’s area. Exp Brain Res. 1998;121(4):371–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Turriziani P. Enhancing memory performance with rTMS in healthy subjects and individuals with mild cognitive impairment: the role of the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Front Hum Neurosci. 2012;6:62.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Utz KS, Dimova V, Oppenländer K, Kerkhoff G. Electrified minds: transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS) as methods of non-invasive brain stimulation in neuropsychology—a review of current data and future implications. Neuropsychologia. 2010;48(10):2789–810.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wexler A. A pragmatic analysis of the regulation of consumer transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS) devices in the United States. J Law Biosci. 2016;2(3):669–96.Google Scholar
  69. Williams JA, Pascual-Leone A, Fregni F. Interhemispheric modulation induced by cortical stimulation and motor training. Phys Ther. 2010;90(3):398–410.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wurzman R, Hamilton R, Pascual-Leone A, Fox M. An open letter concerning do-it-yourself (DIY) users of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). Ann Neurol. 2017;80(1):1–4.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.24689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Zaehle T, Sandmann P, Thorne JD, Jäncke L, Herrmann CS. Transcranial direct current stimulation of the prefrontal cortex modulates working memory performance: combined behavioural and electrophysiological evidence. BMC Neurosci. 2011;12(1):2.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Zohny H. The myth of cognitive enhancement drugs. Neuroethics. 2015;8:257–69.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-015-9232-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Veljko Dubljević
    • 1
    Email author
  • Iris Coates McCall
    • 2
  • Judy Illes
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Philosophy and Religious StudiesNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA
  2. 2.Neuroethics Canada, Division of Neurology, Department of MedicineUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations