Kirsten Wahlstrom
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs) interpret neural activity, applying it to the control of external devices. As BCIs approach market viability, ethical implications come under consideration. This paper identifies potential privacy disruptions. BCI literature is reviewed in order to identify a BCI typology likely to support a privacy analysis. The typology describes the active, reactive, passive and hybrid types of BCI and, where possible, includes examples that are further classified as existing, prospective or speculative. A review of privacy theory supports an analysis that juxtaposes privacy theory and BCI technologies. The analysis finds that while all four types of BCI have potential for disrupting privacy, disruptions are more likely to arise from the use of reactive, passive and hybrid BCIs. Limitations and directions for future research close the paper.
- Toward Direct Brain-Computer Communication. Jacques Vidal. Annual Review of Biophysics and Bioengineering, 2 (1), 157-180, 1973.Google Scholar
- Brain Computer Interfaces, a Review. Luis Nicolas-Alonso and Jaime Gomez-Gil. Sensors, 12 (2), 1211- 1279, 2012.Google Scholar
- Brain--Computer-Interface Research: Coming of Age. Niels Birbaumer. Clinical Neurophysiology, 117 (3), 479-483, 2006.Google Scholar
- Brain-Computer Interfaces: Military, Neurosurgical, and Ethical Perspective. Ivan Kotchetkov, Brian Hwang, Geoffrey Appelboom, Christopher Kellner, and Sander Connolly. Neurosurgical focus, 28 (5), 2010.Google Scholar
- Brain-Computer Interfacing for Intelligent Systems. Anton Nijholt, Desney Tan, Gert Pfurtscheller, Clemens Brunner, José del R. Millán, Brendan Allison, Bernhard Graimann, Florin Popescu, Benjamin Blankertz, and Klaus-Robert Müller. Intelligent Systems, 23 (3), 72-79, 2008. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Brain-Computer Interfaces: Beyond Medical Applications. Jan van Erp, Fabien Lotte, and Michael Tangermann. Computer, 45 (4), 26-34, 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mind Control? Creating Illusory Intentions through a Phony Brain--Computer Interface. Margaret Lynn, Christopher Berger, Travis Riddle, and Ezequiel Morsella. Consciousness and Cognition, 19 (4), 1007-1012, 2010.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Scientific Models and Ethical Issues in Hybrid Bionic Systems Research. Pericle Salvini, Edoardo Datteri, Cecilia Laschi, and Paolo Dario. AI & Society, 22 (3), 431-448, 2008. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hearing Beyond the Normal Enabled by Therapeutic Devices: The Role of the Recipient and the Hearing Profession. Gregor Wolbring. Neuroethics, 6 (3), 607-616, 2013.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Attacking Human Implants: A New Generation of Cybercrime. Mark Gasson and Bert-Jaap Koops. Law, Innovation and Technology, 5 (2), 248-277, 2013.Google Scholar
- The Asilomar Survey: Stakeholders' Opinions on Ethical Issues Related to Brain-Computer Interfacing. Femke Nijboer, Jens Clausen, Brendan Allison, and Pim Haselager. Neuroethics, 6 (3), 541-578, 2013.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ethical Monitoring of Brain-Machine Interfaces. Federica Lucivero and Guglielmo Tamburrini. AI & Society, 22 (3), 449-460, 2008. Google ScholarDigital Library
- App Stores for the Brain: Privacy & Security in Brain-Computer Interfaces. Tamara Bonaci, Ryan Calo, and Howard Chizeck. IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Science, Technology and Engineering, 2014.Google Scholar
- Privacy, Risk and Personal Health Monitoring. Brent Mittelstadt, N. Ben Fairweather, Neil McBride, and Mark Shaw. ETHICOMP, Kolding, Denmark, 2013.Google Scholar
- Privacy, the Theory of Communicative Action and Technology. Kirsten Wahlstrom and N. Ben Fairweather. ETHICOMP, Kolding, Denmark, 2013.Google Scholar
- Brain-Computer Interfaces: A Technical Approach to Supporting Privacy. Kirsten Wahlstrom, N. Ben Fairweather, and Helen Ashman. ETHICOMP, Sheffield, UK, 2011.Google Scholar
- Bonding Brains to Machines: Ethical Implications of Electroceuticals for the Human Brain. Jens Clausen. Neuroethics, 6 (3), 429-434, 2013.Google Scholar
- Ethical and Social Issues Behind Brain-Computer Interface. Kyeong-Yeon Lee and Dayk Jang. 2013 International Winter Workshop on Brain-Computer Interface (BCI), 2013.Google Scholar
- Brain-Computer Interface Systems: Progress and Prospects. Brendan Allison, Elizabeth Wolpaw, and Jonathan Wolpaw. Expert Review of Medical Devices, 4 (4), 463-474, 2007.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Toward Smarter BCIs: Extending BCIs through Hybridization and Intelligent Control. Brendan Allison, Robert Leeb, Clemens Brunner, Gernot Müller-Putz, Günther Bauernfeind, J. W. Kelly, and Christa Neuper. Journal of neural engineering, 9 (1), 013001, 2012.Google Scholar
- An EEG-Based Brain-Computer Interface for Cursor Control. Jonathan Wolpaw, Dennis McFarland, Gregory Neat, and Catherine Forneris. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 78 (3), 252- 259, 1991.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Conversion of EEG Activity into Cursor Movement by a Brain-Computer Interface (BCI). Georg Fabiani, Dennis McFarland, Jonathan Wolpaw, and Gert Pfurtscheller. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 12 (3), 331-338, 2004.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Using a Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) in Reducing Math Anxiety: Evidence from South Africa. Silas Verkijika and Lizette De Wet. Computers & Education, 81, 113-122, 2015.Google Scholar
- Cortically Coupled Computer Vision for Rapid Image Search. Adam Gerson, Lucas Parra, and Paul Sajda. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering [see also IEEE Trans. on Rehabilitation Engineering], 14 (2), 174-179, 2006.Google Scholar
- Talking Off the Top of Your Head: Toward a Mental Prosthesis Utilizing Event-Related Brain Potentials. Larry Farwell and Emanuel Donchin. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 70 (6), 510-523, 1988.Google Scholar
- Vibrotactile Feedback for Brain-Computer Interface Operation. Febo Cincotti, Laura Kauhanen, Fabio Aloise, Tapio Palomäki, Nicholas Caporusso, Pasi Jylänki, Donatella Mattia, Fabio Babiloni, Gerolf Vanacker, Marnix Nuttin, Grazia Maria, and José del R. Millán. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 48937-48949, 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Brain-Machine Interfaces in Space: Using Spontaneous Rather Than Intentionally Generated Brain Signals. Emily Coffey, Anne-Marie Brouwer, Ellen Wilschut, and Jan van Erp. Acta Astronautica, 67 (1-2), 1-11, 2010.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Decoding Attentional Orientation from EEG Spectra. Ramesh Srinivasan, Samuel Thorpe, Siyi Deng, Tom Lappas, and Michael D'Zmura. In Human-Computer Interaction. New Trends, Julie Jacko editors, 176-183, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A Hybrid Brain-Computer Interface Based on the Fusion of Electroencephalographic and Electromyographic Activities. Robert Leeb, Hesam Sagha, Ricardo Chavarriaga, and José del R. Millán. Journal of Neural Engineering, 8 (2), 025011, 2011.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Brain-Actuated Interaction. José del R. Millán, Frédéric Renkens, Josep Mouriño, and Wulfram Gerstner. Artificial Intelligence, 159 (1-2), 241-259, 2004. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hybrid Brain-Computer Interface and Functional Electrical Stimulation for Sensorimotor Training in Participants with Tetraplegia: A Proof-of-Concept Study. Aleksandra Vuckovic, Leslie Wallace, and David Allan. Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy, 39 (1), 3-14, 2015.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Towards an Alternative Concept of Privacy. Christian Fuchs. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 9 (4), 220-237, 2011.Google ScholarCross Ref
- The Right to Privacy. Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis. Harvard Law Review, 4 (5), 193-220, 1890.Google Scholar
- The Right of Privacy. George Ragland. Kentucky Law Journal, 17, 85-122, 1929.Google Scholar
- Right of Privacy-a Half Century's Developments. Louis Nizer. Mich. L. Rev., 39, 526, 1940.Google Scholar
- The Right to Privacy. Judith Thomson. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 4 (4), 295-314, 1975.Google Scholar
- Thomson on Privacy. Thomas Scanlon. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 4 (4), 315-322, 1975.Google Scholar
- Why Privacy Is Important. James Rachels. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 4 (4), 323-333, 1975.Google Scholar
- Privacy, Intimacy, and Personhood. Jeffrey Reiman. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 6 (1), 26-44, 1976.Google Scholar
- The Ethics of Privacy Protection. James Moor. Library Trends, 39 (1), 69-82, 1990.Google Scholar
- A Critical Contribution to Theoretical Foundations of Privacy Studies. Thomas Allmer. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 9 (2), 83-101, 2011.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Property, Privacy, and Personal Data. Paul Schwartz. Harvard Law Review, 117 (7), 2056-2128, 2004.Google Scholar
- A Taxonomy of Privacy. Daniel Solove. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 154 (3), 477-560, 2006.Google ScholarCross Ref
- The Ontological Interpretation of Informational Privacy. Luciano Floridi. Ethics and Information Technology, 7 (4), 185-200, 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Four Challenges for a Theory of Informational Privacy. Luciano Floridi. Ethics and Information Technology, 8 (3), 109-119, 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Privacy and brain-computer interfaces: identifying potential privacy disruptions
Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.
Recommendations
Towards ambulatory brain-computer interfaces: a pilot study with P300 signals
ACE '09: Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment TechnologyBrain-Computer Interfaces (BCI) are communication systems that enable users to interact with computers using only brain activity. This activity is generally measured by ElectroEncephaloGraphy (EEG). A major limitation of BCI is the electrical ...
Comments