Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Privacy, Neuroscience, and Neuro-Surveillance

  • Published:
Res Publica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The beliefs, feelings, and thoughts that make up our streams of consciousness would seem to be inherently private. Nevertheless, modern neuroscience is offering to open up the sanctity of this domain to outside viewing. A common retort often voiced to this worry is something like, ‘Privacy is difficult to define and has no inherent moral value. What’s so great about privacy?’ In this article I will argue against these sentiments. A definition of privacy is offered along with an account of why privacy is morally valuable. In the remaining sections, several privacy protecting principles are defended that would limit various sorts of neuro-surveillance promised by advancements in neuroscience.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen, Anita. 2003. Why privacy isn’t everything: Feminist reflections on personal accountability. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, Anita. 2008. The virtuous spy: Privacy as an ethical limit. The Monist 91: 3–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, Anita. 2011. Unpopular privacy: What must we hide?. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, Grace M., Michael P. Farrell, and Sarbani Banerjee. 1994. Family influences on alcohol abuse and other problem behaviors among black and white adolescents in a general population sample. Journal of Research on Adolescence 4: 183–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baum, Andrew, and Stuart Koman. 1976. Differential response to anticipated crowding: Psychological effects of social and spatial density. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 34: 526–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benn, S.I., and Gerald F. Gaus. 1983. Public and private in social life. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackmun, Harry. 1973. Roe v. Wade, U.S. 410(153):164–165.

  • Bonaci, Tamara, Ryan Calo, and Howard Jay Chizeck. 2014. App stores for the brain: Privacy & security in brain–computer interfaces. In 2014 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Science, Technology and Engineering. 1–7, 23–24.

  • Chekroud Adam M., Jim A. C. Everett, Holly Bridge, and Miles Hewstone. 2014. A review of neuroimaging studies of race-related prejudice: Does amygdala response reflect threat? Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 8. http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00179/full#B60.

  • Clauson-Kaas, J., A. Dzikus, C. Stephens, N. Hojlyng, and P. Aaby. 1996. Urban health: Human settlement indicators of crowding. Third World Planning Review 18: 349–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, Verne C., Paul B. Paulus, and Garvin McCain. 1984. Prison crowding research: The relevance of prison housing standards and a general approach regarding crowding phenomena. American Psychologist 39: 1148–1160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cyranoski, David. 2012. Neuroscience: The mind reader. http://www.nature.com/news/neuroscience-the-mind-reader-1.10816.

  • Davis, Frederick. 1959. What do we mean by ‘Right to privacy’? South Dakota Law Review 4: 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeCew, Judith W. 1997. In pursuit of privacy: Law, ethics, and the rise of technology. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, William O. 1966. Osborn v. United States, 385 U.S. 323.

  • Eaton, Nicholas, Robert F. Kruger, Wendy Johnson, Matt McGue, and William G. Iacono. 2009. Parental monitoring, personality, and delinquency: Further support for a reconceptualization of monitoring. Journal of Research in Personality 43: 49–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, John N., and Alan Booth. 1977. Crowding and human sexual behavior. Social Forces 55: 791–808.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erikson, Erik H. 1963. Childhood and society. New York, NY: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farah, Martha J. 2011. Neuroscience and neuroethics in the 21st century. In The Oxford handbook of neuroethics, ed. Judy Illes, and Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farah, Martha J., Elizabeth M. Smith, Cyrena Gawuga, Dennis Lindsell, and Dean Foster. 2008. Brain imaging and brain privacy: A realistic concern? Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 21(1).

  • Farahany, Nita. 2012. Incriminating thoughts. Stanford Law Review. 64.

  • Farrington, David P., and Christopher P. Nuttall. 1980. Prison size, overcrowding, prison violence and recidivism. Journal of Criminal Justice. 8: 221–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Federspiel, William. 2008. 1984 Arrives: Thought (crime), technology, and the constitution. William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal. 16.

  • Finn, David. 2006. Brain imaging and privacy: How recent advances in neuroimaging implicate privacy concerns. Bepress Legal Series. Working paper 1752.

  • Fischbach, Ruth, and Janet Mindes. 2011. Why neuroethicists are needed. In The Oxford handbook of neuroethics, ed. Judy Illes, and Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, Theodore D., John N. Edwards, Sairudee Vorakitphokatorn, and Santhat Sermsri. 1996. Chronic stress and psychological well-being: evidence from Thailand on household crowding. Social Science Medicine 42: 265–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gavison, Ruth. 1983. Information control: Availability and control. In Public and private in social life, ed. S. Benn, and G. Gaus, 113–134. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gligorov, Nada, and Stephen C. Krieger. 2010. Functional neuroimaging, free will, and privacy. In Healthcare and the effect of technology: developments, challenges and advancements, ed. Stéfane M. Kabene. Hershey, PA: Medical Information Science Reference.

  • Gross, Hyman. 1971. Privacy and autonomy. In Privacy, ed. John W. Chapman, and J. Roland Pennock, 169–181. New York, NY: Atherton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallinan, Dara, Michael Friedewald, Philip Schütz, and Paul de Hert. 2014. Neurodata and neuroprivacy: Data protection outdated? Surveillance and Society 12(1): 55–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hare, Amanda L., Emily G. Marston, and Joseph P. Allen. 2011. Maternal acceptance and adolescents’ emotional communication: A longitudinal study. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 40: 744–751.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, Allen J., Paul J. Whalen, Lisa M. Shin, Sean C. McInerney, Hakan Fischer, and L. Scott. 2000. Differential response in the human amygdala to racial outgroup vs ingroup face stimuli. NeuroReport 11: 2351–2355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haynes, John-Dylan. 2012. Brain reading. In I know what you’re thinking: Brain imaging and mental privacy, ed. Sarah Richmond, Geraint Rees, and Sarah J.  L. Edwards. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobbes, Thomas. 1985. Leviathan: 1651. In Penguin Classics, ed. C. B. MacPhereson

  • Kafka, Randy, and Perry London. 1991. Communication in relationships and adolescent substance use: The influence of parents and friends. Adolescence 26: 587–598.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, Margaret, and Hakan Stattin. 2000. What parents know, how they know it, and several forms of adolescent adjustment: Further support for a reinterpretation of monitoring. Journal of Developmental Psychology. 36: 366–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kessler, Jane. 1966. Psychopathology of childhood. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laudon, Kenneth. 1996. Markets and privacy. Communications of the ACM 39: 93–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lessig, Lawrence. 2002. Privacy as property. Social Research 69: 247–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lever, Annabelle. 2016. Democracy, privacy, and security. In Privacy, security, and accountability, ed. Adam D. Moore. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lever, Annabelle. 2012. Neuroscience v. privacy? A democratic perspective. In I know what you’re thinking: Brain imaging and mental privacy, ed. S. Richmond, G. Rees, and S. J. L. Edwards. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, Tanya. 2013. Brain says guilty! Neural imaging may nab criminals. http://www.livescience.com/37091-brain-imaging-in-the-courtroom.html.

  • Martinovic, Ivan, Doug Davies, Mario Frank, Daniele Perito, Tomas Ros, and Dawn Song. 2012. On the feasibility of side-channel attacks with brain-computer interfaces. In Proceedings of the 21st USENIX conference on security symposium. Berkeley, CA: USENIX Association.

  • McCain, Garvin, Verne Cox, and Paul B. Paulus. 1980. The effect of prison crowding on inmate behavior. Washington DC: US Department of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGinley, Phyllis McGinley. 1959. A lost privilege. Province of the heart. New York, NY: Viking Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Megargee, Edwin. 1977. The association of population density reduced space and uncomfortable temperatures with misconduct in a prison community. The American Journal of Community Psychology 5: 289–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mill, John Stuart, 1859. On Liberty. London: Longman, Roberts & Green.

  • Miller, Greg. 2014. Scientists can’t read your mind with brain scans (yet). http://www.wired.com/2014/04/brain-scan-mind-reading/.

  • Moore, Adam D. 2000. Employee monitoring & computer technology: Evaluative surveillance v. privacy. Business Ethics Quarterly 10(3): 697–709.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, Adam D. 2001. Intellectual property and information control: Philosophic foundations and contemporary issues. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

  • Moore, Adam D. 2003. Privacy: Its meaning and value. American Philosophical Quarterly 40: 215–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, Adam D. 2007. Toward informational privacy rights. San Diego Law Review 44: 809–845.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, Adam D. 2008. Defining Privacy. Journal of Social Philosophy 39: 411–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, Adam D. 2010. Privacy rights: Moral and legal foundations. University Park, PA: Penn State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, Adam D. 2011. Privacy, security, and government surveillance: Wikileaks and the new accountability. Public Affairs Quarterly. 25.

  • Moore, Adam D. 2016. Waiving privacy rights: Responsibility, paternalism, and liberty. Forthcoming, Brookings Institute Press. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2673717.

  • Moreno, Jonathan D. 2011. Brain trust: neuroscience and national security in the 21st century. In The Oxford handbook of neuroethics, ed. Judy Illes, and Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, Griscom. 1972. Mental and social health and population density. Journal of Human Relations 20: 196–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, Lewis. 1961. The city in history. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murdock, George P. 1955. The universals of culture. In Readings in world anthropology, ed. E. Adamson Hoebel, Jesse D. Jennings, and Elmer R. Smith. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, Emily R., and Henry T. Greely. 2011. What will be the limits of neuroscience-based mindreading in the law? In The Oxford handbook of neuroethics, ed. Judy Illes, and Barbara J. Sahakian. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newell, Bryce, Cheryl Metoyer, and Adam D. Moore. 2015. Privacy in the family. In The social dimensions of privacy, ed. Beate Roessler, and Dorota Mokrosinska. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nissenbaum, Helen. 2009. Privacy in context: Technology, policy, and the integrity of social life. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nissenbaum, Helen, and Finn Brunton. 2015. Obfuscation: A user’s guide for privacy and protest. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, Martha C. 2000. Woman and human development: The capabilities approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Otis, James. 1761. In Opposition to writs of assistance. Delivered before the Superior Court. Boston, MA.

  • Parent, W. A. 1983. Privacy, morality, and the law. Philosophy and Public Affairs 12: 269–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, Richard B. 1974. A definition of privacy. Rutgers Law Review 27: 275–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, Paul B., Verne C. Cox, and Garvin McCain. 1978. Death rates, psychiatric commitments, blood pressure and perceived crowding as a function of institutional crowding. Environmental Psychology and Nonverbal Behavior 3: 107–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennock, J. Roland, and John W. Chapman. 1971. Privacy: Nomos XIII. New York, NY: Atherton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phelps, Elizabeth A., Kevin J. O’Connor, William A. Cunningham, E. Sumie Funayama, J. Christopher Gatenby, John C. Gore, and Mahzarin R. Banaji. 2000. Performance on indirect measures of race evaluation predicts amygdala activation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 12: 729–738.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitt, William (the elder, Earl of Chatham). 1763. Speech in the House of Lords. In Historical sketches of statesmen who flourished in the time of George III, vol. 1, by Henry Peter Brougham (London and Glasgow: R. Griffin and Co., 1839).

  • Porporino, F. J., and K. Dudley. 1984. An analysis of the effects of overcrowding in Canadian penitentiaries. Ottawa: Research Division, Programs Branch, Solicitor General of Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rachels, James. 1975. Why privacy is important. Philosophy and Public Affairs 4: 323–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richards, Neil, and Daniel Solove. 2007. Privacy’s other path: Recovering the law of confidentiality. The Georgetown Law Journal 96: 123–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richmond, Sara, Geraint Rees, and Sarah J. L. Edwards. 2012. I know what you’re thinking: Brain imaging and mental privacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, John M., and Thomas Gregor. 1971. Privacy: A cultural view. In Privacy, ed. J. Roland Pennock and John W. Chapman, 199–225. New York, NY: Atherton Press.

  • Rossiter, Clinton. 1958. Aspects of liberty. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rössler, B. 2005. The value of privacy (trans. by Rupert, D. V.). Glasgow and Cambridge, UK: Polity.

  • Ruback, R. Barry, and Timothy S. Carr. 1984. Crowding in a woman’s prison. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 14: 57–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, Pamela. 2000. Privacy as intellectual property? Stanford Law Review. 52: 1125–1173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoeman, Ferdinand David. 1992. Privacy and social freedom. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, Barry. 1968. The social psychology of privacy. American Journal of Sociology 73: 741–752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slobogin, Christopher. 2005. Subpoenas and privacy. DePaul Law Review 54: 805.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiro, Herbert J. 1971. Privacy in comparative perspective. In Privacy, ed. J. Roland Pennock and John W. Chapman, 121–148. New York, NY: Atherton Press.

  • Spitz, Rene A. 1964. The derailment of dialogue. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association 12: 752–775.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stattin, Hakan, and Margaret Kerr. 2000. Parental monitoring: A reinterpretation. Child Development 71: 1072–1085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, Judith Jarvis. 1975. The right to privacy. Philosophy and Public Affairs 4: 295–314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren, Samuel D., and Louis Brandeis. 1890. The right to privacy. The Harvard Law Review 4: 193–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westin, Alan. 1967. Privacy and freedom. New York, NY: Atheneum.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Washington, Information School, Box 352840, Mary Gates Hall, Ste 370, Seattle, WA, 98195-2840, USA

    Adam D. Moore

Authors
  1. Adam D. Moore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adam D. Moore.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moore, A.D. Privacy, Neuroscience, and Neuro-Surveillance. Res Publica 23, 159–177 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11158-016-9341-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11158-016-9341-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation