Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

“Can It Read My Mind?” – What Do the Public and Experts Think of the Current (Mis)Uses of Neuroimaging?

By Joanna M. Wardlaw, Garret O'Connell, Kirsten Shuler, Janet DeWilde, Jane Haley, Oliver Escobar, Shaun Murray, Robert Rae, Donald Jarvie, Peter Sandercock and Burkhard Schafer

Abstract

Emerging applications of neuroimaging outside medicine and science have received intense public exposure through the media. Media misrepresentations can create a gulf between public and scientific understanding of the capabilities of neuroimaging and raise false expectations. To determine the extent of this effect and determine public opinions on acceptable uses and the need for regulation, we designed an electronic survey to obtain anonymous opinions from as wide a range of members of the public and neuroimaging experts as possible. The surveys ran from 1st June to 30 September 2010, asked 10 and 21 questions, respectively, about uses of neuroimaging outside traditional medical diagnosis, data storage, science communication and potential methods of regulation. We analysed the responses using descriptive statistics; 660 individuals responded to the public and 303 individuals responded to the expert survey. We found evidence of public skepticism about the use of neuroimaging for applications such as lie detection or to determine consumer preferences and considerable disquiet about use by employers or government and about how their data would be stored and used. While also somewhat skeptical about new applications of neuroimaging, experts grossly underestimated how often neuroimaging had been used as evidence in court. Although both the public and the experts rated highly the importance of a better informed public in limiting the inappropriate uses to which neuroimaging might be put, opinions differed on the need for, and mechanism of, actual regulation. Neuroscientists recognized the risks of inaccurate reporting of neuroimaging capabilities in the media but showed little motivation to engage with the public. The present study also emphasizes the need for better frameworks for scientific engagement with media and public education

Topics: Research Article
Publisher: Public Library of Science
OAI identifier: oai:pubmedcentral.nih.gov:3186771
Provided by: PubMed Central

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2011). A mock terrorism application of the P300-based concealed information test.
  2. (2009). A picture is worth a thousand dollars.
  3. (2007). Are neuroimages like photographs of the brain?
  4. (2006). Brain imaging: a decade of coverage in the print media.
  5. (2011). Child brain scans to pick out future criminals. Available: http://www telegraph co uk/science/8339772/Child-brain-scans-to-pick-outfuture-criminals html. Accessed
  6. (2011). Different clues from different views: the role of image format in public perceptions of neuroimaging results.
  7. (2002). Do you know your brain? A survey on public neuroscience literacy at the closing of the decade of the brain.
  8. (2010). Dream recording device ‘possible’ researcher claims. Available: http://www bbc co uk/news/science-environment-11635625. Accessed
  9. (2010). How a brain scan could help you choose the perfect career. Available: http://www dailymail co uk/sciencetech/article-1296789/ How-brain-scans-help-choose-career html. Accessed
  10. (2009). MRI lie detection to get first day in court. Available: http:// www wired com/wiredscience/2009/03/noliemri/. Accessed
  11. (2009). Neuroethics resources: moving from ‘‘invisibility’’ to high usability. Available: http://www neuroethics ubc ca/ National_Core_for_Neuroethics/Research_files/CAN2009_Poster_TairyanFe dericoIlles pdf. Accessed
  12. (2011). Neuroimaging in Society: legal, corporate, social and security implications.
  13. (2010). Neuromarketing: the hope and hype of neuroimaging in business.
  14. (2010). Perspectives of Canadian researchers on ethics review of neuroimaging research.
  15. (2010). Reducing barriers to ethics in neuroscience.
  16. (2010). Science in court: head case.
  17. (2008). The implications of the new brain sciences. The ‘Decade of the Brain’ is over but its effects are now becoming visible as neuropolitics and neuroethics, and in the emergence of neuroeconomies.
  18. (2010). Through a scanner darkly: functional neuroimaging as evidence of a criminal defendant’s past mental states.
  19. (2007). U.S. public opinion on uses of genetic information and genetic discrimination. Available: http://www dnapolicy org/ resources/GINAPublic_Opinion_Genetic_Information_Discrimination pdf. Accessed
  20. (2011). What am I thinking and who has the right to know? Contributions from a workshop on the wider societal implications of neuroimaging.
  21. (2003). What does the public want to know about the brain?

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.