神经反馈:滥用的可能性和美国的监管框架。

IF 5.4 2区 生物学 Q1 BIOLOGY
Fiona Furnari, Haesoo Park, Gideon Yaffe, Michelle Hampson
{"title":"神经反馈:滥用的可能性和美国的监管框架。","authors":"Fiona Furnari, Haesoo Park, Gideon Yaffe, Michelle Hampson","doi":"10.1098/rstb.2023.0099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Neurofeedback is a brain-training technique that continues to develop via ongoing innovations, and that has broadening potential impact. Once confined primarily to clinical and research settings, it is increasingly being used in the general population. Such development raises concerns about the current regulatory mechanisms and their adequacy in protecting patterns of economic and political decision-making from the novel technology. As studies have found neurofeedback to change subjects' preferences and mental associations covertly, there is a possibility it will be abused for political and commercial gains. Current regulatory practices (including disclaimer requirements, unfair and deceptive trade practice statutes and undue influence law) may be avenues from which to regulate neurofeedback influence. They are, however, limited. Regulating neurofeedback will face the line-drawing problem of determining when it induces an unacceptable level of influence. We suggest experiments that will clarify how the parameters of neurofeedback training affect its level of influence. In addition, we assert that the reactive nature of the traditional models of regulation will be inadequate against this and other rapidly transforming technologies. An integrated and proactive regulatory system designed for flexibility must be adopted to protect society in this era of modern technological advancement. This article is part of the theme issue 'Neurofeedback: new territories and neurocognitive mechanisms of endogenous neuromodulation'.</p>","PeriodicalId":19872,"journal":{"name":"Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11513161/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Neurofeedback: potential for abuse and regulatory frameworks in the United States.\",\"authors\":\"Fiona Furnari, Haesoo Park, Gideon Yaffe, Michelle Hampson\",\"doi\":\"10.1098/rstb.2023.0099\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Neurofeedback is a brain-training technique that continues to develop via ongoing innovations, and that has broadening potential impact. Once confined primarily to clinical and research settings, it is increasingly being used in the general population. Such development raises concerns about the current regulatory mechanisms and their adequacy in protecting patterns of economic and political decision-making from the novel technology. As studies have found neurofeedback to change subjects' preferences and mental associations covertly, there is a possibility it will be abused for political and commercial gains. Current regulatory practices (including disclaimer requirements, unfair and deceptive trade practice statutes and undue influence law) may be avenues from which to regulate neurofeedback influence. They are, however, limited. Regulating neurofeedback will face the line-drawing problem of determining when it induces an unacceptable level of influence. We suggest experiments that will clarify how the parameters of neurofeedback training affect its level of influence. In addition, we assert that the reactive nature of the traditional models of regulation will be inadequate against this and other rapidly transforming technologies. An integrated and proactive regulatory system designed for flexibility must be adopted to protect society in this era of modern technological advancement. This article is part of the theme issue 'Neurofeedback: new territories and neurocognitive mechanisms of endogenous neuromodulation'.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19872,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11513161/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2023.0099\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2023.0099","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

神经反馈是一种通过不断创新而持续发展的大脑训练技术,其潜在影响日益广泛。它曾经主要局限于临床和研究环境,现在正越来越多地被用于普通人群。这种发展引起了人们对现行监管机制及其是否足以保护经济和政治决策模式免受新技术影响的担忧。研究发现,神经反馈技术可以暗中改变受试者的偏好和心理联想,因此有可能被滥用于政治和商业利益。目前的监管措施(包括免责声明要求、不公平和欺骗性交易行为法规以及不当影响法)可能是监管神经反馈影响的途径。然而,这些途径是有限的。监管神经反馈将面临一个划线问题,即确定神经反馈何时会产生不可接受的影响。我们建议通过实验来阐明神经反馈训练的参数如何影响其影响程度。此外,我们还断言,传统监管模式的被动性将不足以应对这种技术和其他快速变革的技术。在现代技术不断进步的时代,必须采用灵活设计的综合主动监管系统来保护社会。本文是 "神经反馈:内源性神经调节的新领域和神经认知机制 "主题刊物的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Neurofeedback: potential for abuse and regulatory frameworks in the United States.

Neurofeedback is a brain-training technique that continues to develop via ongoing innovations, and that has broadening potential impact. Once confined primarily to clinical and research settings, it is increasingly being used in the general population. Such development raises concerns about the current regulatory mechanisms and their adequacy in protecting patterns of economic and political decision-making from the novel technology. As studies have found neurofeedback to change subjects' preferences and mental associations covertly, there is a possibility it will be abused for political and commercial gains. Current regulatory practices (including disclaimer requirements, unfair and deceptive trade practice statutes and undue influence law) may be avenues from which to regulate neurofeedback influence. They are, however, limited. Regulating neurofeedback will face the line-drawing problem of determining when it induces an unacceptable level of influence. We suggest experiments that will clarify how the parameters of neurofeedback training affect its level of influence. In addition, we assert that the reactive nature of the traditional models of regulation will be inadequate against this and other rapidly transforming technologies. An integrated and proactive regulatory system designed for flexibility must be adopted to protect society in this era of modern technological advancement. This article is part of the theme issue 'Neurofeedback: new territories and neurocognitive mechanisms of endogenous neuromodulation'.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.80
自引率
1.60%
发文量
365
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The journal publishes topics across the life sciences. As long as the core subject lies within the biological sciences, some issues may also include content crossing into other areas such as the physical sciences, social sciences, biophysics, policy, economics etc. Issues generally sit within four broad areas (although many issues sit across these areas): Organismal, environmental and evolutionary biology Neuroscience and cognition Cellular, molecular and developmental biology Health and disease.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信