Abstract
Brain–Computer Interface (BCI) technology is a promising and rapidly advancing research area. It was initially developed in the context of early government-sponsored futuristic research in biocybernetics and human–machine interaction in the United States (US) [1]. This inspired Jacques Vidal to suggest providing a direct link between the inductive mental processes used in solving problems and the symbol-manipulating, deductive capabilities of computers, and to coin the term “Brain-Computer Interface” in his seminal paper published in 1973 [2]. Recent developments in BCI technology, based on animal and human studies, allow for the restoration and potential augmentation of faculties of perception and physical movement, and even the transfer of information between brains. Brain activity can be interpreted through both invasive and noninvasive monitoring devices, allowing for novel, therapeutic solutions for individuals with disabilities and for other non-medical applications. However, a number of ethical and policy issues have been identified in context of the use of BCI technology, with the potential for near-future advancements in the technology to raise unique new ethical and policy questions that society has never grappled with before [3, 4]. Once again, the US is leading in the field with many commercial enterprises exploring different realistic and futuristic applications of BCI technology. For instance, a US company named Synchron recently received FDA approval to proceed with first-in-human trials of its endovascularly implanted BCI device [5].
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Kübler A. The history of BCI: from a vision for the future to real support for personhood in people with locked-in syndrome. Neuroethics. 2020;13:163–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-019-09409-4.
Vidal JJ. Toward direct brain-computer communication. Annu Rev Biophys Bioeng. 1973;2:157–80.
Burwell S, Sample M, Racine E. Ethical aspects of brain computer interfaces: a scoping review. BMC Med Ethics. 2017;18:60. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-017-0220-y.
Coin A, Mulder M, Dubljević V. Ethical aspects of BCI technology: what is the state of the art? Philosophies. 2020;5:31. https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies5040031.
Han JJ. Synchron receives FDA approval to begin early feasibility study of their endovascular, brain-computer interface device. Artif Organs. 2021;45:1134–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/aor.14049.
US Food and Drug Administration. FDA Globalization. 2022. https://www.fdagov/international-programs/fda-globalization.
Friedrich O, Wolkenstein A, Bublitz C, Jox RJ, Racine E, editors. Clinical neurotechnology meets artificial intelligence. Cham: Springer; 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64590-8.
Gilbert F, Tubig P. Cognitive enhancement with brain implants: the burden of abnormality. J Cognit Enhancem. 2018;2:364–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-018-0105-0.
Gilbert F, O’Brien T, Cook M. The effects of closed-loop brain implants on autonomy and deliberation: what are the risks of being kept in the loop? Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2018;27:316–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180117000640.
Gilbert F, Cook M, O’Brien T, Illes J. Embodiment and estrangement: results from a first-in-human “intelligent BCI”. Trial Sci Eng Ethics. 2019;25:83–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-0001-5.
Raza SA, Opie NL, Morokoff A, Sharma RP, Mitchell PJ, Oxley TJ. Endovascular neuromodulation: safety profile and future directions. Front Neurol. 2020;11:351. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2020.00351.
Sefcik RK, Opie NL, John SE, Kellner CP, Mocco J, Oxley TJ. The evolution of endovascular electroencephalography: historical perspective and future applications. Neurosurg Focus. 2016;40:E7. https://doi.org/10.3171/2016.3.FOCUS15635.
Oxley TJ, Yoo PE, Rind GS, Ronayne SM, Lee CMS, Bird C, et al. Motor neuroprosthesis implanted with neurointerventional surgery improves capacity for activities of daily living tasks in severe paralysis: first in-human experience. J Neurointerv Surg. 2021;13:102–8. https://doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-016862.
Soekadar SR, Haagen K, Birbaumer N. Brain-computer interfaces (BCI): restoration of movement and thought from neuroelectric and metabolic brain activity. Underst Complex Syst. 2008;2008 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74479-5_11.
Soekadar SR, Birbaumer N, Slutzky MW, Cohen LG. Brain-machine interfaces in neurorehabilitation of stroke. Neurobiol Dis. 2015;83:172–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbd.2014.11.025.
Soekadar SR, Witkowski M, Gómez C, Opisso E, Medina J, Cortese M, et al. Hybrid EEG/EOG-based brain/neural hand exoskeleton restores fully independent daily living activities after quadriplegia. Sci Robot. 2016;1:eaag3296. https://doi.org/10.1126/scirobotics.aag3296.
Hildt E. What will this do to me and my brain? Ethical issues in brain-to-brain interfacing. Front Syst Neurosci. 2015;9:17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnsys.2015.00017.
Hildt E. Multi-person brain-to-brain interfaces: ethical issues. Front Neurosci. 2019;13:1177. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2019.01177.
Sample M, Aunos M, Blain-Moraes S, Bublitz C, Chandler JA, Falk TH, et al. Brain-computer interfaces and personhood: interdisciplinary deliberations on neural technology. J Neural Eng. 2019;16:063001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/ab39cd.
Wolbring G. Why NBIC? Why human performance enhancement? Innovation Europ J Soc Sci Res. 2008;21:25–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610802002189.
Hughes JJ. Moral enhancement requires multiple virtues: toward a posthuman model of character development. Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2014;24:86–95. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180114000334.
Hughes J. Citizen cyborg: Why democratic societies must respond to the redesigned human of the future. 2004.
Rao RPN. Brain co-processors: using AI to restore and augment brain function. Handbook of Neuroengineering. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2848-4_32-1.
Bell CJ, Shenoy P, Chalodhorn R, Rao RPN. Control of a humanoid robot by a noninvasive brain-computer interface in humans. J Neural Eng. 2008:5. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2560/5/2/012.
Rao RPN. Brain-computer interfacing: An introduction. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139032803.
Blank RH, Burau V, Kuhlmann E. Comparative health policy. Bloomsbury Publishing; 2017.
Blank RH. Cognitive enhancement: Social and public policy issues. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-57248-6.
Barfield W, Williams A. Law, cyborgs, and technologically enhanced brains. Philosophies. 2017;2:4. https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies2010006.
Blitz MJ. Searching minds by scanning brains. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50004-1.
Cyberbiosecurity GD. An emerging field that has ethical implications for clinical neuroscience. Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2021;30:662–8. https://doi.org/10.1017/S096318012100013X.
Jantz J, Molnar A, Alcaide R. A brain-computer interface for extended reality interfaces. ACM SIGGRAPH 2017 VR Village, SIGGRAPH, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1145/3089269.3089290.
Coin A, Dubljević V. The authenticity of machine-augmented human intelligence: therapy, enhancement, and the extended mind. Neuroethics. 2021:14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-020-09453-5.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Coin, A., Dubljević, V. (2023). An Introduction to Policy, Identity, and Neurotechnology: The Neuroethics of Brain–Computer Interfaces. In: Dubljević, V., Coin, A. (eds) Policy, Identity, and Neurotechnology. Advances in Neuroethics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-26801-4_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-26801-4_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-26800-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-26801-4
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)