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
Review
. 2021 Nov 15:15:658930.
doi: 10.3389/fnins.2021.658930. eCollection 2021.

Projections and the Potential Societal Impact of the Future of Neurotechnologies

Kate S Gaudry  1 , Hasan Ayaz  2   3   4   5   6 , Avery Bedows  7 , Pablo Celnik  8 , David Eagleman  9 , Pulkit Grover  10   11 , Judy Illes  12   13 , Rajesh P N Rao  14 , Jacob T Robinson  15   16   17   18 , Krishnan Thyagarajan  19 ; Working Group on Brain-Interfacing Devices in 2040
Collaborators, Affiliations
Review

Projections and the Potential Societal Impact of the Future of Neurotechnologies

Kate S Gaudry et al. Front Neurosci. .

Abstract

Traditionally, recording from and stimulating the brain with high spatial and temporal resolution required invasive means. However, recently, the technical capabilities of less invasive and non-invasive neuro-interfacing technology have been dramatically improving, and laboratories and funders aim to further improve these capabilities. These technologies can facilitate functions such as multi-person communication, mood regulation and memory recall. We consider a potential future where the less invasive technology is in high demand. Will this demand match that the current-day demand for a smartphone? Here, we draw upon existing research to project which particular neuroethics issues may arise in this potential future and what preparatory steps may be taken to address these issues.

Keywords: brain interfacing; brain recording; brain stimulation; ethics; minutely invasive; neuroethics; non-invasive; policy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

DE was employed by Neurosensory, Inc. and Braincheck. KG was employed by Kilpatrick Townsend and Stockton LLP. AB was employed by The Substrate Group. KT was employed by Palo Alto Research Center (PARC), A Xerox Company. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Illustration of how different types of neurotechnology generally vary with respect to performance and invasiveness.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Adaikkan C., Tsai L.-H. (2020). Gamma entrainment: impact on neurocircuits, glia, and therapeutic opportunities. Trends Neurosci. 43 24–41. 10.1016/j.tins.2019.11.001 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ayaz H., Dehais F. (2019). Neuroergonomics: the Brain at Work and Everyday Life (1st ed.). United States: Elsevier Academic Press.
    1. Barbe M. T., Tonder L., Krack P., Debû B., Schüpbach M., Paschen S., et al. (2020). Deep Brain Stimulation for Freezing of Gait in Parkinson’s Disease With Early Motor Complications. Mov. Disord. 35 82–90. 10.1002/mds.27892 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bard I., Gaskell G., Allansdottir A., de Cunha R. V., Eduard P., Hampel J., et al. (2018). Bottom up ethics – neuroenhancement in education and employment. Neuroethics 11 309–322. 10.1007/s12152-018-9366-7 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Beynel L., Davis S. W., Crowell C. A., Hilbig S. A., Lim W. (2019). Online repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation during working memory in younger and older adults: a randomized within-subject comparison. PLoS One 14:e0213707. 10.1371/journal.pone.0213707 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources