Autonomy and coercion in academic "cognitive enhancement" using methylphenidate: Perspectives of key stakeholders

Forlini, Cynthia and Racine, Eric 2009, Autonomy and coercion in academic "cognitive enhancement" using methylphenidate: Perspectives of key stakeholders, Neuroethics, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 163-177, doi: 10.1007/s12152-009-9043-y.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title Autonomy and coercion in academic "cognitive enhancement" using methylphenidate: Perspectives of key stakeholders
Author(s) Forlini, CynthiaORCID iD for Forlini, Cynthia
Racine, Eric
Journal name Neuroethics
Volume number 2
Issue number 3
Start page 163
End page 177
Total pages 15
Publisher Springer, Berlin
Publication date 2009-11-01
ISSN 1874-5490
Keyword(s) Social Sciences
Science & Technology
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Medical Ethics
Social Sciences, Biomedical
Social Sciences - Other Topics
Biomedical Social Sciences
Cognitive enhancement
Public understanding
Summary There is mounting evidence that methylphenidate (MPH; Ritalin) is being used by healthy college students to improve concentration, alertness, and academic performance. One of the key concerns associated with such use of pharmaceuticals is the degree of freedom individuals have to engage in or abstain from cognitive enhancement (CE). From a pragmatic perspective, careful examination of the ethics of acts and contexts in which they arise includes considering coercion and social pressures to enhance cognition. We were interested in understanding how university students, parents of university students, and healthcare providers viewed autonomy and coercion in CE using MPH. We found that perspectives converged on the belief that CE is a matter of personal and individual choice. Perspectives also converged on the existence of tremendous social pressures to perform and succeed. Parents emphasized personal responsibility and accountability for CE choices, and expressed feelings of worry, sadness and fear about CE. Students emphasized the importance of personal integrity in CE, expressed tolerance for personal choices of others, and highlighted the challenge that CE poses to maintaining one's personal integrity. Healthcare providers emphasized the health consequences of CE. These results illustrate: (1) the importance of understanding how context is viewed in relation to perspectives on autonomous choice; (2) the limitations of individualistic libertarian approaches that do not consider social context; and (3) the ethical implications of public health interventions in a value-laden debate where perspectives diverge. © 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
DOI 10.1007/s12152-009-9043-y
Indigenous content off
Field of Research 1702 Cognitive Sciences
2201 Applied Ethics
2203 Philosophy
HERDC Research category C1.1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
Persistent URL

Document type: Journal Article
Collections: Faculty of Health
School of Medicine
Connect to link resolver
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 57 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 77 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 55 Abstract Views, 0 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Wed, 10 Jul 2019, 15:27:58 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact