Keynote speakers

School of Medicine and Health, Technical University of Munich, GER
Homepage

On Neuroenhancement and Cognitive Liberty

Abstract
As we progress through the 2020s, the field of neurotechnologies is advancing rapidly, with significant developments in neuroenhancement that promise to expand the boundaries of human cognitive abilities. This surge includes innovative brain-computer interfaces (BCIs), biohybrid systems, and neuromorphic technologies. The integration of such technologies into our biological framework can potentially enhance decision-making, emotional regulation, and overall cognitive function, moving from open-loop systems towards adaptive closed-loop modalities that respond to the user’s mental state in real-time. Cognitive liberty, the right to control one’s mental processes, becomes a useful conceptual tool in navigating the complex ethical terrain these technologies present. This presentation examines neuroenhancements through the lens of cognitive liberty, addressing the philosophical and empirical concerns of integrating such technologies with human cognition. On the one hand, cognitive liberty highlights the need for individuals to have the autonomy to enhance their cognitive functions in ways that reflect their personal values without coercion or unfair societal pressure. On the other hand, it emphasizes their right to refuse unwanted neuroenhancing interventions. This presentation will explore questions such as the balance between personal autonomy and societal norms, the preservation of individual identity amidst technological alteration, and the right to exercise control over one’s own mental information. It also discusses issues of equitable accessible, problematizing a future where cognitive liberty is a privilege rather than a right. Finally, the talk will challenge the assumption that enhanced performance is synonymous with improved subjective well-being. The indeterminacy between quantitative enhancement and qualitative experience will be outline to underscore the importance of ensuring that neuroenhancements contribute positively to individual’s lives, respecting their psychological and experiential dimensions.

Department of Psychology, Texas State University, USA
Homepage

Understanding the prevalence and outcomes of real-world cognitive enhancement

Abstract
Background: While cognitive enhancement using prescription stimulant medication is a long-standing focus of research and real-world experimentation, newer technologies (e.g., transcranial magnetic stimulation) offer the potential for non-medication interventions to improve cognition. Unlike stimulant medication, the availability, motives for use, and consequences of cognitive enhancement methods are understudied Methods: Systematic review of the literature, using the PubMed, PsycInfo, and Google Scholar databases. Results were searched using a set of terms (e.g., “neurocognitive”, “cognitive”, “enhancement”, 
“improvement”, “medication”, “stimulation”) in various combinations. Searches occurred in 2024, concluding in early November 2024. Results: A wealth of research evidence suggests that prescription stimulant misuse is common in young adults, especially those pursuing higher education. Such misuse is primarily for cognitive enhancement purposes, though a notable minority engage in misuse for recreational or euphoric purposes. Consequences of prescription stimulant misuse among those without Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder are generally minor, as are any benefits, but include transition to illicit stimulant use and development of substance use disorder. Caffeine use as cognitive enhancement is also common, with debates about its effectiveness and limited evidence of harms. Other medications or supplements (e.g., melatonin) have only limited research on potential cognitive enhancement. Brain stimulation and brain-computer interface interventions are largely or exclusively limited to lab or clinical settings, and ongoing research is assessing their impact. Implications: Clear research evidence suggests that misuse of prescription stimulants for cognitive enhancement in healthy individuals (i.e., those without ADHD) has limited benefits with the potential for significant risks. Other interventions to enhance cognition are limited primarily to laboratory or clinical environments but warrant ongoing study and surveillance to understand how their use potentially expands and what the positive effects and negative consequences are of these interventions.

Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy,  University of Pennsylvania, USA
Homepage

Navigating the Future of Cognitive Enhancement Technologies

Abstract
In an era where neurotechnology holds the promise of transcending human cognitive limitations, the ethical, societal, and regulatory implications of its adoption are subjects of critical importance. Although many envisioned devices are not yet available, this presentation will focus on research concerning existing cognitive enhancement technology. I will begin by outlining the current landscape of neural recording and neural stimulation devices marketed to the general public for cognitive enhancement. I will then present data on how alternative medical practitioners are marketing neurofeedback services to the public for neuroenhancement purposes.1 Additionally, I will explore the ethical issues raised by these devices and services, such as those related to truthful representation of evidence base, marketing to vulnerable populations, provider competency, deception, and conflicts of interest.2,3 Finally, I will discuss the different regulatory pathways for neuroenhancement products and services, highlighting the limits of government oversight.4 To conclude, I will suggest several measures beyond regulation that can mitigate risks and maximize the positive impact of cognitive enhancement technologies.