CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 178Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical InnovationsEthics in Clinical ResearchBiomedical Ethics and Regulation

Monitoring and Manipulating Brain Function: New Neuroscience Technologies and Their Ethical Implications.

Farah, Martha J., Wolpe, Paul Root·2004·The Hastings Center Report
DOI 10.2307/3528418
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Martha J. Farah, Paul Root Wolpe, Monitoring and Manipulating Brain Function: New Neuroscience Technologies and Their Ethical Implications, The Hastings Center Report, Vol. 34, No. 3 (May - Jun., 2004), pp. 35-45

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/3528418

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Brainjacking-where bad actors attempt to gain unauthorised access to neural data-is a threat.

    “Consider, for instance, the threat of “brainjacking”—where bad actors attempt to gain unauthorised (at least, indirect) access to what you are thinking by gaining access to neural data and data pertaining to which thought commands are implemented by the eBCI, or to your neural data more generally [37–40].”

    From Ethical considerations for the use of brain–computer interfaces for cognitive enhancement (2024) · cites this paper as [40]

    The Neuroimaging section (p. 3) says brain imaging can reveal psychological states without a person's cooperation or consent, and Ethical Issues in Neuroimaging (p. 5) identifies privacy as a central concern. The paper does not describe “brainjacking,” bad actors gaining access to neural data, or access to eBCI thought-command data; Pending Challenges (p. 9) also qualifies a serious privacy threat as dependent on further technological progress. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 43

  1. [2]2. M.J. Farah, 'Emerging ethical issues in neuroscience,' Nature Neuroscience 5 (2002): 1123-29; J. Illes, M.P Kirschen, and J. Gabrieli,'From Neuroimaging to Neuroethics,' Nature Neuroscience 6 (2003): 205; D. Marcus, ed., Neuroethics Mapping the Field Conference , Proceedings of The Dana Foundation, 2002; A. Roskies, 'Neuroethics for the New Millenium,' Neuron 35(2002): 21-23.
  2. [3]3. P .R. Wolpe, 'Neuroethics,' Encyclopedia of Bioethics, 3rd edition (Farmington Hills, Mich.: Macmillan Reference, 2004).
  3. [7]7. D.C. Alsop and J.A. Detre, 'Multisectional Cerebral Flow MR Imaging with Continuous Arterial Spin Labeling,' Radiology 208 (1998): 410-16.
  4. [8]8. G.K. Aguirre, 'Functional Neuroimaging,' in Behavioral Neurology and Neuropsychology, second edition (New York: McGraw Hill, 2003).
  5. [9]9. J. Ashburner and K.J. Friston, 'Voxelbased Morphometry-the Methods,' Neuroimage 11 (2000): 805-21.
  6. [10]10. Z.J. Koles, 'T rends in EEG Source Localization,' Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 106 (1998): 12737.
  7. [11]11. A. Villringer and B. Chance, 'Noninvasive Optical Spectroscopy and Imaging of Human Brain Function,' Trends in Neuroscience 20 (1997): 435-42.
  8. [13]13. D.D. Dougherty et al., 'Dopamine Transporter Density in Patients with Attention Deficit Hyperacivity Disorder,' Lancet 354 (1999): 2132-33.
  9. [14]14. H. Fischer, G. Wik, and M. Fredrikson, 'Extraverion, Neuroticism, and Brain Function: A PET Study of Personality,' Personality and Individual Differences 23 (1997): 345-52; D.L. Johnson et al., 'Cerebral Blood Flow and Personality: A Positron Emission Tomography Study,' American Journal of Psychiatry 156 (1999): 252-57; M. Sugiura et al., 'Correlation between Human Personality and Neural Activity in Cerebral Cortex,' NeuroImage 11 (2000): 541-46; T. Youn et al., 'Relationship between Personality T rait and Regional Cerebral Glucose Metabolism Assessed with Positron Emission Tomography,' Biological Psychology 60 (2002): 109-20; T. Canli and Z. Amin, 'Neuroimaging of Emotion and Personality: Scientific Evidence and Ethical Considerations,' Brain and Cognition 50 2002): 414-31.
  10. [15]15. T. Canli et al., 'An fMRI Study of Personality Influences on Brain Reactivity to Emotional Stimuli,' Behavioral Neuroscience 115 (2001): 33-42.
  11. [16]16. T. Canli et al., 'Amygdala Response to Happy Faces as a Function of Extraversion,' Science 296 (2002): 2191.
  12. [17]17. E.A. Phelps et al., 'Performance on Indirect Measures of Race Evaluation Predicts Amygdala Activation,' Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 12 (2000): 729-38.
  13. [18]18. A.J. Hart et al., 'Differential Response in the Human Amugdala to Racial Outgroup vs. Ingroup Face Stimuli,' Neuroreport 11 (2000): 2351-55.
  14. [19]19. J. Greene et al., 'An fMRI Investigation of Emotional Engagement in Moral Judgement,' Science 293 (2001): 21052108.
  15. [20]20. A.R Childress et al., 'Limbic Activation during Cue-induced Cocaine Craving,' American Journal of Psychiatry 156 (1999): 11-18.
  16. [21]21. H. Garavan et al., 'Cue-induced Cocaine Craving: Neuroanatomical Specificity for Drug Users and Drug Stimuli,' American of Journal of Psychiatry 157 (2000): 1789-98.
  17. [23]23. K.L. Phan, T. Wager, S.F . Taylor, and I. Liberzon, 'Functional Neuroanatomy of Emotion: A Meta-analysis of Emotion Activation Studies in PET and fMRI,' Neuroimage 16 (2002): 331-48.
  18. [24]24. P .J. Whalen et al., 'Masked Presentations of Emotional Facial Expressions Modulate Amygdala Activity without Explicit Knowledge,' Journal of Neuroscience 18 (1998): 411-18.
  19. [26]26. T .M. Lee et al., 'Lie Detection by Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging,' Human Brain Mapping 15 (2002): 157-64.
  20. [30]30. R. Cabeza et al., 'Can Medial Temporal Regions Distinguish T rue from False?' Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 98 (2001): 4805-10.
  21. [31]31. A. Raine et al., 'Reduced Prefrontal and Increased Subcortical Brain Functioning Assessed Using Positron Emission T omography in Predatory and Affective Murderers,' Behavioral Science and Law 16 (1998): 319-32.
  22. [32]32. J.V . Haxby et al., 'Distributed and Overlapping Representations of Faces and Objets in Ventral T emporal Cortex,' Science 293 (2001): 2425-30.
  23. [33]33. K.M. O'Craven and N. Kanwisher, 'Mental Imagery of Faces and Places Activates Corresponding Stimulus-specific Brain Regions,' Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 12 (2000): 1013-23.
  24. [38]38. S.H. Barondes, Better than Prozac: Creating the Next Generation of Psychiatric Drugs (London, Oxford University Press, 2003).
  25. [39]39. G.S. Mahli and P . Sachdev, 'Novel Physical T reatments for the Management of Neuropsychiatric Disorders,' Journal Psychosomatic Research 53 (2002): 709-19.
  26. [40]40. M. George, E. Wasserman, and R. Post, 'T ranscranial Magnetic Stimulation: A Neuropsychiatric Tool for the 21st century,' Journal of Neuropsychiatry Clinical Neuroscience 8 (1996): 373-82.
  27. [41]41. A.W. Snyder et al., 'Savant-like Skills Exposed in Normal People by Suppressing the Left Fronto-temporal Lobe,' Journal of Integrative Neuroscience 2 (2003):149-58.
  28. [42]42. J. Donoghue, 'Connecting Cortex to Machines: Recent Advances in Brain Interfaces,' Nature Neuroscience Supplement 5 (2002): 1085-88.
  29. [44]44. H. Hoag, 'Neuroengineering: Remote control,' Nature 423 (2003): 796-798.
  30. [45]45. P .D. Kramer, Listening to Prozac (New York: Penguin, 1993).
  31. [46]46. B. Knutson et al., 'Selective Alteration of Personality and Social Behavior by Serotonergic Intervention,' American Journal of Psychiatry 155 (1998): 373-79; W.S. Tse and A.J. Bond, 'Serotonergic Intervention Affects Both Social Dominance and Affiliative Behaviour,' Psychopharmacology 161 (2002): 324-30.
  32. [48]48. NIH, Diagnosis and Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder , NIH Consensus Statement 16, no. 2 (1998): 137.
  33. [50]50. Q. Babcock and T. Byrne, 'Student Perceptions of Methylphenidate Abuse at a Public Liberal Arts College,' Journal of American College Health 49 (2000): 143-45.
  34. [51]51. L.H. Diller, 'Running on Ritalin: Attention ficit disorder and stimulanttreatment in the 1990s,' Hastings Center Report 26 (1996): 12-14.
  35. [52]52. P .E. Gold, L. Cahill,and G.L. Wenk, 'Ginkgo Biloba: a cognitive enhancer?,' Psychological Science in the Public Interest 3 (2002): 2-11.
  36. [53]53. G. Lynch, 'Memory enhancement: the search for mechanism-based drugs,' Nature Neuroscience 5 (2002): 1035-1038.
  37. [54]54. M. Ingvar et al., 'Enhancement by an Ampakine of Memory Encoding in Humans,' Experimental Neurology 146 (1997): 553-59.
  38. [56]56. A.R. Luria, The Mind of a Mnemonist (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1968).
  39. [60]60. See C. Elliot, Better than Well: American Medicine Meets the American Dream (New York: Norton, 2003); E. Parens, (Ed.) Enhancing Human Traits: Social and Ethical Implications (Washington: Georgetown University Press, 2000).
  40. [61]61. M.J. Farah et al., 'Neurocognitive Enhancement: What Can We Do? What Should We Do?' Nature Reviews Neuroscience 5 (2004): 421-25; P .R. Wolpe, 'Treatment, enhancement, and the ethics of neurotherapeutics,' Brain and Cognition 50 (2003): 387-395.
  41. [62]62. J.D. Moreno, 'Neuroethics: An Agenda or Neuroscience and Society,' Nature Reviews Neuroscience 4 (2003): 149-53.
  42. [63]63. V. Sanchez, J. Camarero, B. Esteban,M.J. Peter,A.R. Green,and M.I. Colado, 'The mechanisms involved in the longlasting neuroprotective effect of fluoxetine against MDMA ('ecstasy')-induced degeneration of 5-HT nerve endings in rat brain,' British Journal of Pharmacology 134 (2001): 46-57.
  43. [66]66. S. Morse, 'Brain and Blame,' Georgetown Law Journal 84 (1996).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Farah, M. J., & Wolpe, P. R.
Affiliations
University of Pennsylvania (US)
ORCID
Venue
The Hastings Center Report
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
2004-05
Volume
34
Issue
3
Pages
35
ISSN
0093-0334 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2307/3528418
OpenAlex
W1991827610
Cited by
178
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 9
FWCI
8.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Hastings Center Report (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01 DA 14129, R21 DA01586, R01DA014129)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD043078)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics in Clinical Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Biomedical Ethics and Regulation
Keywords
neuromonitoring, brain manipulation, ethics of neuroscience, neurotechnology, neuroethics
MeSH terms
Diagnostic Imaging, Ethics, Medical, Forensic Psychiatry, Humans, Neurosciences, Psychiatry, Nootropic Agents, Biomedical Technology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review