• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Public understanding of science >Stakeholder perspectives and reactions to 'academic' cognitive enhancement: Unsuspected meaning of ambivalence and analogies
【24h】

Stakeholder perspectives and reactions to 'academic' cognitive enhancement: Unsuspected meaning of ambivalence and analogies

机译：利益相关者的观点和对“学术”认知增强的反应：矛盾和类比的意想不到的含义

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The existence of diverging discourses in the media and academia on the use of prescription medications to improve cognition in healthy individuals, i.e. "cognitive enhancement" (CE) creates the need to better understand perspectives from stakeholders. This qualitative focus-group study examined perspectives from students, parents and healthcare providers on CE. Stakeholders expressed ambivalence regarding CE (i.e. reactions to, definitions of, risks, and benefits). They were reluctant to adopt analogies to performance-enhancing steroids and caffeine though these analogies were useful in discussing concepts common to the use of different performance-enhancing substances. Media coverage of CE was criticized for lack of scientific rigor, ethical clarity, and inadvertent promotion of CE. Ambivalence of stakeholders suggests fundamental discomfort with economic and social driving forces of CE. Forms of public dialogue that voice the unease and ambivalence of stakeholders should be pursued to avoid opting hastily for permissive or restrictive health policies for CE.
机译：媒体和学术界关于使用处方药改善健康人的认知（即“认知增强”（CE））的说法存在分歧，因此有必要更好地了解利益相关者的观点。这项定性的焦点小组研究考察了学生，家长和医疗保健提供者对CE的观点。利益相关者表达了对CE的歧义（即对CE的反应，定义，风险和利益）。他们不愿采用类比增强类固醇和咖啡因的方法，尽管这些类比有助于讨论使用不同性能增强物质的共同概念。批评CE的媒体报道缺乏科学严谨，道德规范以及对CE的无意宣传。利益相关者的矛盾情绪表明，CE的经济和社会驱动力带来了根本的不适。应当采取表达利益相关者的不安和矛盾情绪的公开对话形式，以避免仓促为行政长官选择宽松或限制性的卫生政策。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号