参与者参与、认知不公正和早期植入神经装置研究。

IF 2.3 3区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Lilyana Levy, Ashley Feinsinger
{"title":"参与者参与、认知不公正和早期植入神经装置研究。","authors":"Lilyana Levy,&nbsp;Ashley Feinsinger","doi":"10.1002/hast.70022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><i>In recent years, participant engagement initiatives in research on implanted neural devices have significantly increased. However, there remains little consensus on the motivations, goals, and best practices for engagement efforts. Drawing on the concept of</i> participatory epistemic injustice, <i>we argue that one core ethical motivation for engagement is epistemic in nature. Based on their subject positions, participants should be key knowledge contributors to implanted neurotech research. Therefore, we argue, participants experience participatory epistemic injustice when their insights do not result in changes to or otherwise influence research protocols, device development, and task design. We contend that engagement can resist this type of injustice only if it establishes robust methods not only to gather but also to actively incorporate participant knowledge into the research and development process</i>.</p>","PeriodicalId":55073,"journal":{"name":"Hastings Center Report","volume":"55 5","pages":"18-28"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hast.70022","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Participant Engagement, Epistemic Injustice, and Early-Phase Implanted Neural Device Research\",\"authors\":\"Lilyana Levy,&nbsp;Ashley Feinsinger\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/hast.70022\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><i>In recent years, participant engagement initiatives in research on implanted neural devices have significantly increased. However, there remains little consensus on the motivations, goals, and best practices for engagement efforts. Drawing on the concept of</i> participatory epistemic injustice, <i>we argue that one core ethical motivation for engagement is epistemic in nature. Based on their subject positions, participants should be key knowledge contributors to implanted neurotech research. Therefore, we argue, participants experience participatory epistemic injustice when their insights do not result in changes to or otherwise influence research protocols, device development, and task design. We contend that engagement can resist this type of injustice only if it establishes robust methods not only to gather but also to actively incorporate participant knowledge into the research and development process</i>.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55073,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hastings Center Report\",\"volume\":\"55 5\",\"pages\":\"18-28\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hast.70022\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hastings Center Report\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hast.70022\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hastings Center Report","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hast.70022","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近年来,参与植入神经装置研究的主动性显著增加。然而,关于参与努力的动机、目标和最佳实践仍然没有达成共识。借鉴参与性认知不公正的概念,我们认为参与的一个核心伦理动机本质上是认知的。根据他们的学科位置,参与者应该是植入神经技术研究的关键知识贡献者。因此,我们认为,当参与者的见解不会导致研究方案、设备开发和任务设计的变化或以其他方式影响研究方案时,参与者会经历参与性认知不公正。我们认为,只有建立健全的方法,不仅收集而且积极地将参与者的知识纳入研究和开发过程,参与才能抵制这种不公正。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Participant Engagement, Epistemic Injustice, and Early-Phase Implanted Neural Device Research

Participant Engagement, Epistemic Injustice, and Early-Phase Implanted Neural Device Research

In recent years, participant engagement initiatives in research on implanted neural devices have significantly increased. However, there remains little consensus on the motivations, goals, and best practices for engagement efforts. Drawing on the concept of participatory epistemic injustice, we argue that one core ethical motivation for engagement is epistemic in nature. Based on their subject positions, participants should be key knowledge contributors to implanted neurotech research. Therefore, we argue, participants experience participatory epistemic injustice when their insights do not result in changes to or otherwise influence research protocols, device development, and task design. We contend that engagement can resist this type of injustice only if it establishes robust methods not only to gather but also to actively incorporate participant knowledge into the research and development process.

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
Hastings Center Report
Hastings Center Report 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
3.00%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Hastings Center Report explores ethical, legal, and social issues in medicine, health care, public health, and the life sciences. Six issues per year offer articles, essays, case studies of bioethical problems, columns on law and policy, caregivers’ stories, peer-reviewed scholarly articles, and book reviews. Authors come from an assortment of professions and academic disciplines and express a range of perspectives and political opinions. The Report’s readership includes physicians, nurses, scholars, administrators, social workers, health lawyers, and others.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信