Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Neuroethics in Educational Technology: Keeping the Brain in Mind When Developing Frameworks for Ethical Decision-Making

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Mind, Brain and Technology

Abstract

Cyberlearning involves the convergence of psychology, education, learning technologies, computer science, engineering, and information science. Given the similar rate of advances in the educational neuroscience over the past couple decades, there is a growing interest in interaction between neuroscience and education. While cyberlearning has called attention to the stimulating potential that these new technologies (and the research behind them) have to offer, less emphasis has been placed upon the moral and ethical issues that may result from the widespread use of the learning technologies and neuroscience. This chapter aims to offer a first attempt at discussing some of the ethical issues inherent in brain-based cyberlearning research and practice.

“It just doesn’t matter whether the data are stored somewhere inside the biological organism or stored in the external world. What matters is how information is poised for retrieval and for immediate use as and when required.”

Clark ( 2003 ) , p. 69

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Allied Control Council. (1949). Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals Under Control Council Law No. 10. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2001). Principles of biomedical ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berg, J. W., Mehlman, M. J., Rubin, D. B., & Kodish, E. (2009). Making all the children above average: Ethical and regulatory concerns for pediatricians in pediatric enhancement research. Clinical Pediatrics, 48(5), 472–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohil, C. J., Alicea, B., & Biocca, F. A. (2011). Virtual reality in neuroscience research and therapy. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 12(12), 752–762.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christman, J. (2004). Relational autonomy, liberal individualism, and the social constitution of selves. Philosophical Studies, 117(1), 143–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A. J. (2003). Natural-born cyborgs: Minds, technologies and the future of human intelligence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A. (2008). Supersizing the mind: Embodiment, action, and cognitive extension. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis, 58(1), 7–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clausen, J., & Levy, N. (Eds.). (2015). Handbook of neuroethics. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farah, M. J. (2012). Neuroethics: The ethical, legal, and societal impact of neuroscience. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 571–591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farah, M. J., Illes, J., Cook-Deegan, R., Gardner, H., Kandel, E., King, P., et al. (2004). Neurocognitive enhancement: What can we do and what should we do? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5(5), 421–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, K. W., & Bidell, T. (2006). Dynamic development of action and thought. In W. Damon & R. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 1: Theoretical models of human development (6th ed., pp. 313–399). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forlini, C., Gauthier, S., & Racine, E. (2013). Should physicians prescribe cognitive enhancers to healthy individuals? Canadian Medical Association Journal, 185(12), 1047–1050.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frith, C. D., & Frith, U. (2007). Social cognition in humans. Current Biology, 17(16), R724–R732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaucher, N., Payot, A., & Racine, E. (2013). Cognitive enhancement in children and adolescents: Is it in their best interests? Acta Paediatrica, 102(12), 1118–1124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graf, W. D., Nagel, S. K., Epstein, L. G., Miller, G., Nass, R., & Larriviere, D. (2013). Pediatric neuroenhancement Ethical, legal, social, and neurodevelopmental implications. Neurology, 80(13), 1251–1260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heersmink, R. (2017). Extended mind and cognitive enhancement: Moral aspects of cognitive artifacts. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 16(1), 17–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heersmink, R., & Carter, J. A. (2017). The philosophy of memory technologies: Metaphysics, knowledge, and values. Memory Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750698017703810

  • Howard-Jones, P. (2010). Introducing neuroeducational research: Neuroscience, education and the brain from contexts to practice. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Illes, J. (2006). Neuroethics: Defining the issues in theory, practice, and policy. Oxford. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Illes, J. (Ed.). (2017). Neuroethics: Anticipating the future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2008). The smoke around mirror neurons: Goals as sociocultural and emotional organizers of perception and action in learning. Mind, Brain, and Education, 2(2), 67–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Singh, V. (2011). Perspectives from social and affective neuroscience on the design of digital learning technologies. In R. A. Calvo & S. K. D’Mello (Eds.), New perspectives on affect and learning technologies (pp. 233–241). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Januszewski, A., & Molenda, M. (Eds.). (2007). Educational technology: A definition with commentary (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Juengst, E. (1998). What does enhancement mean? In E. Parens (Ed.), Enhancing human traits: Ethical and social implications (pp. 29–47). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kane, R. L., & Parsons, T. D. (Eds.). (2017). The role of technology in clinical neuropsychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klopfer, E., Perry, J., Squire, K., Jan, M. F., & Steinkuehler, C. (2005, May). Mystery at the museum: a collaborative game for museum education. In Proceedings of the 2005 Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning: Learning 2005: The Next 10 Years! (pp. 316–320). International Society of the Learning Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lalancette, H., & Campbell, S. R. (2012). Educational neuroscience: Neuroethical considerations. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 7(1), 37–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, N. (2007a). Rethinking neuroethics in the light of the extended mind thesis. American Journal of Bioethics, 7(9), 3–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, N. (2007b). Neuroethics: Challenges for the 21th century. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, N. (2011). Neuroethics and the extended mind. In J. Illes & B. J. Sahakian (Eds.), Oxford handbook of neuroethics (pp. 285–294). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, C. (2010). Imagining oneself otherwise. In C. Mackenzie & N. Stoljar (Eds.), Relational autonomy: Feminist perspectives on autonomy, agency, and the social self (pp. 124–150). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maher, B. (2008). Poll results: Look who’s doping: In January, Nature launched an informal survey into readers’ use of cognition-enhancing drugs. Brendan Maher has waded through the results and found large-scale use and a mix of attitudes towards the drugs. Nature, 452(7188), 674–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meshi, D., Tamir, D. I., & Heekeren, H. R. (2015). The emerging neuroscience of social media. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(12), 771–782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, J. P. (2008). Contributions of functional neuroimaging to the study of social cognition. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(2), 142–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montag, C., & Reuter, M. (Eds.). (2017). Internet addiction: Neuroscientific approaches and therapeutical implications including smartphone addiction. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montfort, D. B., & Brown, S. (2013). What do we mean by cyberlearning: Characterizing a socially constructed definition with experts and practitioners. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(1), 90–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mystery at the Museum. (2003). [Computer software]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Teacher Education Program & The Education Arcade. Retrieved March 17, 2013, from http://education.mit.edu/ar/matm.html

  • Nagel, S. K., Hrincu, V., & Reiner, P. B. (2016, May 13–14). Algorithm anxiety— do decision- making algorithms pose a threat to autonomy? Presented at 2016 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Engineering, Science and Technology, Vancouver, BC.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. (1978). The Belmont Report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research-the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. US Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nedelsky, J. (1989). Reconceiving autonomy: Sources, thoughts and possibilities. Yale Journal of Law and Feminism, 1(1), 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Office for Human Research Protections [OHRP]. (1979). The Belmont Report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. Retrieved from http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/belmont.html

  • Parens, E. (Ed.). (2000). Enhancing human traits: Ethical and social implications. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T. D. (2015). Virtual reality for enhanced ecological validity and experimental control in the clinical, affective, and social neurosciences. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, 660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T. D. (2016). Clinical neuropsychology and technology: What’s new and how we can use it. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T. D. (2017). Cyberpsychology and the brain: The interaction of neuroscience and affective computing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T.D., Gaggioli, A., & Riva, G. (2017). Virtual environments in social neuroscience. Brain Sciences, 7(42), 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T. D., Riva, G., Parsons, S., Mantovani, F., Newbutt, N., Lin, L., et al. (2017). Virtual reality in pediatric psychology: Benefits, challenges, and future directions. Pediatrics, 140, 86–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T. D., Rizzo, A. A., Rogers, S. A., & York, P. (2009). Virtual reality in pediatric rehabilitation: A review. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 12, 224–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poulin, C. (2001). Medical and nonmedical stimulant use among adolescents: From sanctioned to unsanctioned use. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 165(8), 1039–1044.

    Google Scholar 

  • Racine, E., & Aspler, J. (Eds.). (2017). Debates about neuroethics: Perspectives on its development, focus, and future. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Racine, E., & Illes, J. (2008). Neuroethics. In P. Singer & A. Viens (Eds.), Cambridge textbook of bioethics (pp. 495–504). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Reiner, P. B., & Nagel, S. K. (2017). Technologies of the extended mind: Defining the issues. In J. Illes & S. Hossain (Eds.), Neuroethics: Anticipating the future (pp. 108–122). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, I., & Kelleher, K. J. (2010). Neuroenhancement in young people: Proposal for research, policy, and clinical management. AJOB Neuroscience, 1(1), 3–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smart, P. R. (2012). The web-extended mind. Metaphilosophy, 43(4), 446–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spector, J. M. (2005). Innovations in instructional technology: An introduction to this volume. In J. M. Spector, C. Ohrazda, A. Van Schaack, & D. A. Wiley (Eds.), Innovations in instructional technology: Essays in honor of M. David Merrill (pp. xxxi–xxxvi). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spector, J. M. (2015). Foundations of educational technology: Integrative approaches and interdisciplinary perspectives (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Spector, J. M. (2016). Ethics in educational technology: Towards a framework for ethical decision making in and for the discipline. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(5), 1003–1011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spector, J. M., Merrill, M. D., Elen, J., & Bishop, M. J. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed.). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanovich, K. E. (2009). Distinguishing the reflective, algorithmic, and autonomous minds: Is it time for a tri-process theory. In J. Evans & K. Frankish (Eds.), In two minds: Dual processes and beyond (pp. 55–88). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stein, Z., & Fischer, K. W. (2011). Directions for mind, brain, and education: Methods, models, and morality. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(1), 56–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uddin, L. Q., Iacoboni, M., Lange, C., & Keenan, J. P. (2007). The self and social cognition: The role of cortical midline structures and mirror neurons. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(4), 153–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verbeek, P.-P. (2006). Persuasive technology and moral responsibility toward an ethical framework for persuasive technologies. Persuasive, 6, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verbeek, P.-P. (2009). Ambient intelligence and persuasive technology: The blurring boundaries between human and technology. NanoEthics, 3(3), 231–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilens, T. E., Adler, L. A., Adams, J., Sgambati, S., Rotrosen, J., Sawtelle, R., et al. (2008). Misuse and diversion of stimulants prescribed for ADHD: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 47(1), 21–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Medical Association. (1964). World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki - ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Ferney-Voltaire: World Medical Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeaman, A. R. J. (2016). Competence and circumstance. TechTrends, 60, 195–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Information, University of North Texas, Computational Neuropsychology and Simulation, Denton, TX, USA

    Thomas D. Parsons

Authors
  1. Thomas D. Parsons
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas D. Parsons .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. College of Information, University of North Texas Computational Neuropsychology and Simulation, Denton, TX, USA

    Thomas D. Parsons

  2. Department of Learning Technologies, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA

    Lin Lin

  3. Department of Learning Technologies, Fort Worth Museum of Science and History, University of North Texas, Fort Worth, TX, USA

    Deborah Cockerham

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Association for Educational Communications and Technology

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Parsons, T.D. (2019). Neuroethics in Educational Technology: Keeping the Brain in Mind When Developing Frameworks for Ethical Decision-Making. In: Parsons, T.D., Lin, L., Cockerham, D. (eds) Mind, Brain and Technology. Educational Communications and Technology: Issues and Innovations. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02631-8_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02631-8_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-02630-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-02631-8

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation