Australian University Students' Attitudes Towards the Acceptability and Regulation of Pharmaceuticals to Improve Academic Performance
Graduate studies at Western
Neuroethics 6 (1):197-205 (2013)
|Abstract||There is currently little empirical information about attitudes towards cognitive enhancement - the use of pharmaceutical drugs to enhance normal brain functioning. It is claimed this behaviour most commonly occurs in students to aid studying. We undertook a qualitative assessment of attitudes towards cognitive enhancement by conducting 19 semi-structured interviews with Australian university students. Most students considered cognitive enhancement to be unacceptable, in part because they believed it to be unethical but there was a lack of consensus on whether it was similar or different to steroid use in sport. There was support for awareness campaigns and monitoring of cognitive enhancement use of pharmaceutical drugs. An understanding of student attitudes towards cognitive enhancement is important in formulating future policy|
|Keywords||Cognitive enhancement Neuroenhancement Attitudes Qualitative research Stimulants|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Gavin G. Enck (2013). Ideals of Student Excellence and Enhancement. Neuroethics 6 (1):155-164.
Nick Bostrom (2009). Cognitive Enhancement: Methods, Ethics, Regulatory Challenges. [REVIEW] Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (3):311-341.
Simon Outram (2012). Ethical Considerations in the Framing of the Cognitive Enhancement Debate. Neuroethics 5 (2):173-184.
Fred K. Beard (2003). College Student Attitudes Toward Advertising's Ethical, Economic, and Social Consequences. Journal of Business Ethics 48 (3):217-228.
Cynthia Forlini & Eric Racine (2009). Autonomy and Coercion in Academic “Cognitive Enhancement” Using Methylphenidate: Perspectives of Key Stakeholders. [REVIEW] Neuroethics 2 (3):163-177.
Frederic Gilbert & Bernard Baertschi (2011). Neuroenhancement: Much Ado About Nothing? American Journal Of Bioethics Neuroscience 2 (4):45-47.
Ingmar Persson & Julian Savulescu (2008). The Perils of Cognitive Enhancement and the Urgent Imperative to Enhance the Moral Character of Humanity. Journal of Applied Philosophy 25 (3):162-177.
Eric Racine & Cynthia Forlini (2010). Cognitive Enhancement, Lifestyle Choice or Misuse of Prescription Drugs? Neuroethics 3 (1):1-4.
Danielle C. Turner & Barbara J. Sahakian (2006). Neuroethics of Cognitive Enhancement. 1 (1):113--123.
M. Lynnette Smyth & James R. Davis (2004). Perceptions of Dishonesty Among Two-Year College Students: Academic Versus Business Situations. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 51 (1):63-73.
Michael W. Small (1992). Attitudes Towards Business Ethics Held by Western Australian Students: A Comparative Study. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 11 (10):745 - 752.
Lubomira Radoilska (2010). An Aristotelian Approach to Cognitive Enhancement. Journal of Value Inquiry 44 (3):365–375.
D. M. Shaw (2012). Neuroenhancers, Addiction and Research Ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics 38 (10):605-608.
Nick Bostrom (forthcoming). Smart Policy: Cognitive Enhancement and the Public Interest. In Julian Savulescu, Ruud ter Muelen & Guy Kahane (eds.), Enhancing Human Capabilities. Wiley-Blackwell.
Added to index2012-02-13
Total downloads39 ( #34,866 of 740,328 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,455 of 740,328 )
How can I increase my downloads?