Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Mar 14;14(3):e0213619.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0213619. eCollection 2019.

How perceived substance characteristics affect ethical judgement towards cognitive enhancement

Eric Mayor  1 , Maxime Daehne  1 , Renzo Bianchi  1
Affiliations

How perceived substance characteristics affect ethical judgement towards cognitive enhancement

Eric Mayor et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Some individuals seek to enhance their cognitive capabilities through the use of pharmacology. Such behavior entails potential health risks and raises ethical concerns. The aim of this study was to examine whether a precursor of behavior, ethical judgement towards the use of existing biological cognitive enhancers (e.g., coffee, legal and illegal drugs), is shaped by the perceived characteristics of these cognitive enhancers. Students and employees completed an online questionnaire which measured perceived characteristics of 15 substances presented as potential cognitive enhancers and a measure of ethical judgement towards these cognitive enhancers. Results of mixed model regression analyzes show that ethical judgement is more favourable when cognitive enhancers are perceived as being legal, familiar, efficient, and safe for users' health, supporting all hypotheses. Results further show that 36% of variance (in the null model) lies at the level of cognitive enhancers and 21% at the level of participants. In conclusion, cognitive enhancers vary widely in terms of ethical judgement, which is explained by the perception of the mentioned characteristics. Implications regarding prevention and policy-making are discussed.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

References

    1. Smith ME, Farah MJ. Are prescription stimulants “smart pills”? The epidemiology and cognitive neuroscience of prescription stimulant use by normal healthy individuals. Psychol Bull. 2011;137: 717–41. 10.1037/a0023825 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dubljević V, & Ryan CJ. Cognitive enhancement with methylphenidate and modafinil: conceptual advances and societal implications. Neurosci Neuroecon. 2015;4:25–33.
    1. Franke AG, Bagusat C, Rust S, Engel A, & Lieb K. Substances used and prevalence rates of pharmacological cognitive enhancement among healthy subjects. Eur Arch Psy Clin N. 2014;264:83–90. - PubMed
    1. Partridge BJ, Bell SK, Lucke JC, Yeates S, & Hall WD. Smart drugs “as common as coffee”: media hype about neuroenhancement. PloS one. 2011;6:e28416 10.1371/journal.pone.0028416 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Illies C. The grounds of ethical judgement: new transcendental arguments in moral philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2003.