Files and links (2)
Published, Version of Record (VoR)Open Access via Drexel Libraries Read and Publish Program 2025CC BY V4.0, Open
Journal article
Evaluating Risk and Benefit Sensitivity for Cognitive Treatments
Journal of cognitive enhancement, v 9(2)
22 Mar 2025
Featured in Collection : Research Supported by Drexel Libraries' OA Programs
Abstract
Ethical judgments require clinicians, researchers, research participants, and patients to weigh risks and benefits. Novel treatments for cognitive deficits are rapidly emerging, but little is known about how individual differences in risk and benefit sensitivity influence ethical judgments to administer treatments. The public plays important roles as citizens, taxpayers, and consumers of cognitive treatments, yet little is known about how they evaluate risks and benefits in ethical judgments. We examined the influence of risk and benefit sensitivity on the public’s choices about treating cognitive dysfunction. We administered surveys, cognitive measures, and an ethical judgment paradigm to 425 participants recruited via Amazon Mechanical Turk. Participants were asked to choose whether to recommend a hypothetical cognitive treatment with varying degrees of risks and benefits across seven different cognitive domains. We expected participants to be more risk-sensitive than benefit-sensitive, especially when evaluating treatments that influence cognitive functions central to personal identity such as mood, self-control, and long-term memory. Unexpectedly, participants were slightly more sensitive to benefits and showed inter-domain stability across cognitive dysfunctions. Our results suggest that risks and benefits influence whether the public might recommend cognitive treatments. The relatively higher weight placed on benefits could be explained by prominent theories of decision-making under risk. Overall, this study suggests that judgment tasks can be adapted to study psychological ethical choices about treatments for cognitive deficits. Further study of individual variation in risk and benefit sensitivity and their influence on real-world ethical choices about cognitive repair could inform frameworks to enhance optimal neuroethical decision-making.
Metrics
7 Record Views
Details
- Title
- Evaluating Risk and Benefit Sensitivity for Cognitive Treatments
- Creators
- Kiante A. Fernandez - University of California, Los AngelesBrian A Erickson - Drexel University, Psychological and Brain Sciences (Psychology)Joseph W Kable - University of PennsylvaniaRoy H Hamilton - University of PennsylvaniaJohn D Medaglia (Corresponding Author) - Drexel University, Psychological and Brain Sciences (Psychology)
- Publication Details
- Journal of cognitive enhancement, v 9(2)
- Publisher
- Springer Nature
- Number of pages
- 16
- Grant note
- National Institutes of Health
We thank Byron Biney for programming the initial experimental task. We thank Mike DeKay for the helpful discussions.
- Resource Type
- Journal article
- Language
- English
- Academic Unit
- Psychological and Brain Sciences (Psychology)
- Web of Science ID
- WOS:001498733500002
- Scopus ID
- 2-s2.0-105000795032
- Other Identifier
- 991022040869004721
UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
This publication has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:
InCites Highlights
Data related to this publication, from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool:
- Collaboration types
- Domestic collaboration
- Web of Science research areas
- Neurosciences