17 found
Order:
Disambiguations
Matthew Sample [16]Matthew S. Sample [1]
See also
Matthew Sample
Leibniz Universität Hannover
  1.  47
    Ethical Aspects of Brain Computer Interfaces: A Scoping Review.Sasha Burwell, Matthew Sample & Eric Racine - 2017 - BMC Medical Ethics 18 (1):60.
    Brain-Computer Interface is a set of technologies that are of increasing interest to researchers. BCI has been proposed as assistive technology for individuals who are non-communicative or paralyzed, such as those with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis or spinal cord injury. The technology has also been suggested for enhancement and entertainment uses, and there are companies currently marketing BCI devices for those purposes as well as health-related purposes. The unprecedented direct connection created by BCI between human brains and computer hardware raises various (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  2.  39
    Two Problematic Foundations of Neuroethics and Pragmatist Reconstructions.Eric Racine & Matthew Sample - 2018 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 27 (4):566-577.
    Common understandings of neuroethics, i.e., of its distinctive nature, are premised on two distinct sets of claims: (1) neuroscience can change views about the nature of ethics itself and neuroethics is dedicated to reaping such an understanding of ethics; (2) neuroscience poses challenges distinct from other areas of medicine and science and neuroethics tackles those issues. Critiques have rightfully challenged both claims, stressing how the first may lead to problematic forms of reductionism while the second relies on debatable assumptions about (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  3.  39
    Engineering the Brain: Ethical Issues and the Introduction of Neural Devices.Eran Klein, Tim Brown, Matthew Sample, Anjali R. Truitt & Sara Goering - 2015 - Hastings Center Report 45 (6):26-35.
    Neural engineering technologies such as implanted deep brain stimulators and brain-computer interfaces represent exciting and potentially transformative tools for improving human health and well-being. Yet their current use and future prospects raise a variety of ethical and philosophical concerns. Devices that alter brain function invite us to think deeply about a range of ethical concerns—identity, normality, authority, responsibility, privacy, and justice. If a device is stimulating my brain while I decide upon an action, am I still the author of the (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  4.  31
    Keeping Disability in Mind: A Case Study in Implantable Brain–Computer Interface Research.Laura Specker Sullivan, Eran Klein, Tim Brown, Matthew Sample, Michelle Pham, Paul Tubig, Raney Folland, Anjali Truitt & Sara Goering - 2018 - Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (2):479-504.
    Brain–Computer Interface research is an interdisciplinary area of study within Neural Engineering. Recent interest in end-user perspectives has led to an intersection with user-centered design. The goal of user-centered design is to reduce the translational gap between researchers and potential end users. However, while qualitative studies have been conducted with end users of BCI technology, little is known about individual BCI researchers’ experience with and attitudes towards UCD. Given the scientific, financial, and ethical imperatives of UCD, we sought to gain (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  5. Stanford’s Unconceived Alternatives From the Perspective of Epistemic Obligations.Matthew S. Sample - 2015 - Philosophy of Science 82 (5):856-866.
    Kyle Stanford’s reformulation of the problem of underdetermination has the potential to highlight the epistemic obligations of scientists. Stanford, however, presents the phenomenon of unconceived alternatives as a problem for realists, despite critics’ insistence that we have contextual explanations for scientists’ failure to conceive of their successors’ theories. I propose that responsibilist epistemology and the concept of “role oughts,” as discussed by Lorraine Code and Richard Feldman, can pacify Stanford’s critics and reveal broader relevance of the “new induction.” The possibility (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  6.  36
    Brain-Computer Interfaces and Personhood: Interdisciplinary Deliberations on Neural Technology.Matthew Sample, Marjorie Aunos, Stefanie Blain-Moraes, Christoph Bublitz, Jennifer Chandler, Tiago H. Falk, Orsolya Friedrich, Deanna Groetzinger, Ralf J. Jox & Johannes Koegel - 2019 - Journal of Neural Engineering 16 (6).
    Scientists, engineers, and healthcare professionals are currently developing a variety of new devices under the category of brain-computer interfaces (BCIs). Current and future applications are both medical/assistive (e.g., for communication) and non-medical (e.g., for gaming). This array of possibilities comes with ethical challenges for all stakeholders. As a result, BCIs have been an object of both hope and concern in various media. We argue that these conflicting sentiments can be productively understood in terms of personhood, specifically the impact of BCIs (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  7.  33
    Do Publics Share Experts’ Concerns About Brain–Computer Interfaces? A Trinational Survey on the Ethics of Neural Technology.Matthew Sample, Sebastian Sattler, David Rodriguez-Arias, Stefanie Blain-Moraes & Eric Racine - 2019 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 2019 (6):1242-1270.
    Since the 1960s, scientists, engineers, and healthcare professionals have developed brain–computer interface (BCI) technologies, connecting the user’s brain activity to communication or motor devices. This new technology has also captured the imagination of publics, industry, and ethicists. Academic ethics has highlighted the ethical challenges of BCIs, although these conclusions often rely on speculative or conceptual methods rather than empirical evidence or public engagement. From a social science or empirical ethics perspective, this tendency could be considered problematic and even technocratic because (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  8.  24
    Silent Performances: Are “Repertoires” Really Post-Kuhnian?Matthew Sample - 2017 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 61:51-56.
    Ankeny and Leonelli propose “repertoires” as a new way to understand the stability of certain research programs as well as scientific change in general. By bringing a more complete range of social, material, and epistemic elements into one framework, they position their work as a correction for the Kuhnian impulse in philosophy of science and other areas of science studies. I argue that this “post-Kuhnian” move is not complete, and that repertoires maintain an internalist perspective, caused partly by an asymmetrical (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  9.  10
    Neuroessentialism in Discussions About the Impact of Closed-Loop Technologies on Agency and Identity.Eric Racine, Ariane Quintal & Matthew Sample - 2017 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 8 (2):81-83.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  10.  14
    Science, responsibility, and the philosophical imagination.Matthew Sample - 2022 - Synthese 200 (2):1-19.
    If we cannot define science using only analysis or description, then we must rely on imagination to provide us with suitable objects of philosophical inquiry. This process ties our intellectual findings to the particular ways in which we philosophers think about scientific practice and carve out a cognitive space between real world practice and conceptual abstraction. As an example, I consider Heather Douglas’s work on the responsibilities of scientists and document her implicit ideal of science, defined primarily as an epistemic (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11.  2
    Asilomar Survey: Researcher Perspectives on Ethical Guidelines for BCI Research.Michelle Trang Pham, Sara Goering, Matthew Sample, Jane Huggins & Eran Klein - 2018 - Brain-Computer Interfaces 4 (5):97-111.
    Brain-computer Interface (BCI) research is rapidly expanding, and it engages domains of human experience that many find central to our current understanding of ourselves. Ethical principles or guidelines can provide researchers with tools to engage in ethical reflection and to address practical problems in research. Though researchers have called for clearer ethical principles or guidelines, there is little existing data on what form these should take. We developed a prospective set of ethical principles for BCI research with specific guidelines and (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  12.  24
    Pragmatism for a Digital Society: The (In)Significance of Artificial Intelligence and Neural Technology.Matthew Sample & Eric Racine - 2021 - In Orsolya Friedrich, Andreas Wolkenstein, Christoph Bublitz, Ralf J. Jox & Eric Racine (eds.), Clinical Neurotechnology meets Artificial Intelligence. Springer. pp. 81-100.
    Headlines in 2019 are inundated with claims about the “digital society,” making sweeping assertions of societal benefits and dangers caused by a range of technologies. This situation would seem an ideal motivation for ethics research, and indeed much research on this topic is published, with more every day. However, ethics researchers may feel a sense of déjà vu, as they recall decades of other heavily promoted technological platforms, from genomics and nanotechnology to machine learning. How should ethics researchers respond to (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13.  37
    Multi-Cellular Engineered Living Systems: Building a Community Around Responsible Research on Emergence.Matthew Sample, Marion Boulicault, Caley Allen, Rashid Bashir, Insoo Hyun, Megan Levis, Caroline Lowenthal, David Mertz & Nuria Montserrat - 2019 - Biofabrication 11 (4).
    Ranging from miniaturized biological robots to organoids, multi-cellular engineered living systems (M-CELS) pose complex ethical and societal challenges. Some of these challenges, such as how to best distribute risks and benefits, are likely to arise in the development of any new technology. Other challenges arise specifically because of the particular characteristics of M-CELS. For example, as an engineered living system becomes increasingly complex, it may provoke societal debate about its moral considerability, perhaps necessitating protection from harm or recognition of positive (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14.  24
    Do We Need Neuroethics?Eric Racine & Matthew Sample - 2019 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 10 (3):101-103.
    Do we need neuroethics? This provocative question, posed almost 20 years after a series of landmark neuroethics conferences in North America (Marcus 2002; Canadian Institutes of Health Research 2002), can’t be answered briefly. We can, however, consider some of the most important arguments in favor of neuroethics. First, neuroethics may appear to be needed because neuroscience offers a new lens on human morality. This is an argument made by neuroscientists Michael Gazzaniga (Gazzaniga 2005) and (to some extent) Jean-Pierre Changeux (Changeux (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15. Neuroengineering and Ethics: Identifying Common Themes and Areas of Need Across Proposed Ethical Frameworks.Michelle Trang Pham, Matthew Sample, Ishan Dasgupta, Sara Goering & Eran Klein - forthcoming - In Nitish V. Thakor (ed.), Springer Handbook of Neuroengineering.
    Recent advancements in neuroengineering research have prompted neuroethicists to propose a variety of “ethical guidance” frameworks (e.g., principles, guidelines, framing questions, responsible research innovation frameworks, and ethical priorities) to inform this work. In this chapter, we offer a comparative analysis of five recently proposed ethical guidance frameworks (NIH neuroethics guiding principles, Nuffield Council on Bioethics, Global Neuroethics Summit Delegates, the Center for Neurotechnology’s neuroethical principles and guidelines, and the Neurotechnology Ethics Taskforce’s ethical priorities). We identify some common themes among these (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16.  11
    Imagining Responsibility, Imagining Responsibly: Reflecting on Our Shared Understandings of Science.Matthew Sample - manuscript
    If we cannot define science using only analysis or description, then we must rely on imagination to provide us with suitable objects of philosophical inquiry. This process links our findings to the particular ways in which we philosophers idealize scientific practice and carve out an experimental space between real world practice and thought experiments. As an example, I examine Heather Douglas’ recent work on the responsibilities of scientists and contrast her account of science with that of “technoscience,” as mobilized in (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17.  10
    Evolutionary, Not Revolutionary: Current Prospects for Diagnostic Neuroimaging.Matthew Sample - 2012 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 3 (4):46-48.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark