File(s) under permanent embargo
Stakeholder perspectives and reactions to "academic" cognitive enhancement: unsuspected meaning of ambivalence and analogies
journal contribution
posted on 2012-07-01, 00:00 authored by Cynthia ForliniCynthia Forlini, E RacineThe existence of diverging discourses in the media and academia on the use of prescription medications to improve cognition in healthy individuals, i.e. "cognitive enhancement" (CE) creates the need to better understand perspectives from stakeholders. This qualitative focus-group study examined perspectives from students, parents and healthcare providers on CE. Stakeholders expressed ambivalence regarding CE (i.e. reactions to, definitions of, risks, and benefits). They were reluctant to adopt analogies to performance-enhancing steroids and caffeine though these analogies were useful in discussing concepts common to the use of different performance-enhancing substances. Media coverage of CE was criticized for lack of scientific rigor, ethical clarity, and inadvertent promotion of CE. Ambivalence of stakeholders suggests fundamental discomfort with economic and social driving forces of CE. Forms of public dialogue that voice the unease and ambivalence of stakeholders should be pursued to avoid opting hastily for permissive or restrictive health policies for CE.
History
Journal
Public understanding of scienceVolume
21Issue
5Pagination
606 - 625Publisher
SAGE PublicationsLocation
London, Eng.Publisher DOI
ISSN
0963-6625eISSN
1361-6609Language
engPublication classification
C1.1 Refereed article in a scholarly journalUsage metrics
Categories
No categories selectedKeywords
Licence
Exports
RefWorks
BibTeX
Ref. manager
Endnote
DataCite
NLM
DC