Building Conceptions of Cognitive Enhancement: University Students’ Views on the Effects of Pharmacological Cognitive Enhancers

2019 ◽  
Vol 54 (6) ◽  
pp. 908-920 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kira London-Nadeau ◽  
Priscilla Chan ◽  
Suzanne Wood
2021 ◽  
pp. 147821032110619
Author(s):  
Fanny Monnet ◽  
Christina Ergler ◽  
Eva Pilot ◽  
Preeti Sushama ◽  
James Green

Qualitative work with students who use prescription medicines for academic purposes is limited. Thus, a more nuanced understanding of tertiary students’ experiences is urgently needed. Our study – which draws on five semi-structured interviews with New Zealand university students, complemented with information from local newspapers, blog entries and discussion forums – reveals students’ motivations and perceived effects, their risk perceptions and provides insights into the circumstances enabling the engagement with prescription medicines for academic purposes. Students were influenced by peers and social norms; and ideas about identity, morality and fairness also played a role for engaging with cognitive enhancers. Students used high levels of stress and workload to justify their use but took individual responsibility for their practices. By taking responsibility in this way, rather than considering it as a product of their environment, they buy into the neoliberal university discourse. Unexpectedly, some participants were already receiving medically justified psychopharmacological treatment but extended and supplemented this with nonmedical use. Others considered their use as being for academic emergencies, and that their low level of use helped manage risks. Overall, students viewed pharmacological cognitive enhancement for improving academic performance as cautious, safe, and morally acceptable. We argue in this paper that a local understanding of students’ motivations, justifications and perceptions of pharmacological cognitive enhancement is required, to tailor policies and support systems better to their needs and behaviours.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. e68821 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Sattler ◽  
Carsten Sauer ◽  
Guido Mehlkop ◽  
Peter Graeff

Author(s):  
Raissa Carolina Fonseca Cândido ◽  
Edson Perini ◽  
Cristiane Menezes de Pádua ◽  
Daniela Rezende Junqueira

Author(s):  
Fabrice Jotterand

This chapter considers the use of cognitive enhancers in healthy individuals with cognitive deficits caused by mental impairment. The objectives of this analysis are twofold: (1) to outline some of the problems associated with the attempt to distinguish the concept of enhancement from therapy, and (2) to show the relevance of the distinction between two different categories of cognitive enhancement in the attempt to demonstrate why the notion of human enhancement might become part of the therapeutic language of tomorrow. The various conceptualizations of enhancement found in literature, especially as outlined by Chadwick and Agar, are examined in this chapter and the notion of the clinical ideal to evaluate the concept of enhancement in the context of clinical interventions is introduced. In the final section of the chapter, the implications of the clinical ideal in relation to the use of cognitive enhancers in people with mental impairment are considered.


Author(s):  
Nils-Frederic Wagner ◽  
Jeffrey Robinson ◽  
Christine Wiebking

Using cognitive enhancement technology is becoming increasingly popular. In another paper, the authors argued that using pharmacological cognitive enhancers is detrimental to society, through promoting competitiveness over cooperation, by usurping personal and social identifies and thus changing our narrative and moral character. In this chapter, the authors seek to expand that argument by looking at an emerging technology that is rapidly gaining popularity, that of transcranial stimulation (TS). Here the authors explore TS via two major methods, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial electrical stimulation (TES). In this, the authors seek to demonstrate that artificial cognitive enhancement is detrimental to society. Furthermore, that the argument can be applied beyond the moral dubiousness of using pharmacological cognitive enhancement, but applied to new, emergent technologies as well. In other words, artificial cognitive enhancement regardless of the technology/medium is detrimental to society.


2016 ◽  
Vol 26 ◽  
pp. S697-S698 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Santacroce ◽  
F. Sarchione ◽  
O. Corazza ◽  
M. Lupi ◽  
E. Cinosi ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 379-399 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleksi Hupli ◽  
Gabija Didžiokaitė ◽  
Marte Ydema

This article examines the ambiguous relationship between treating illness and enhancing normalcy through the use of “cognitive enhancement” drugs. Although the literature on pharmacological neuro-enhancement generally differentiates between the “licit/therapeutic” and “illicit/enhancement” use of substances, in-depth interviews with 35 university students in the Netherlands and Lithuania—both with and without formal medical diagnoses of (mainly) Attention Deficit Disorder and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder—reveal the fluidity of these categories. Our study of the perceptions and experiences of people who use such drugs further suggests a much broader range of substances, motives, and sought-after effects than are commonly acknowledged in the “cognitive enhancement” literature. We need a more inclusive and context-sensitive approach to study pharmacological neuro-enhancement, for instance, by approaching both licit and illicit drugs as tools or instruments.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document