Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ethical Challenges Associated with the Development and Deployment of Brain Computer Interface Technology

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Neuroethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Brain Computer Interface (BCI) technology offers potential for human augmentation in areas ranging from communication to home automation, leisure and gaming. This paper addresses ethical challenges associated with the wider scale deployment of BCI as an assistive technology by documenting issues associated with the development of non-invasive BCI technology. Laboratory testing is normally carried out with volunteers but further testing with subjects, who may be in vulnerable groups is often needed to improve system operation. BCI development is technically complex, sometimes requiring lengthy recording sessions to achieve the necessary personalisation of the paradigms, and this can present ethical challenges that vary depending on the subject group. The paper contributes to the on-going ethical discussion surrounding the deployment BCI outside the specialist laboratory and suggests some tentative guidelines for BCI research teams, appropriate to those deploying the technology, derived from experience on a multisite project. Any tension between deployment and technical progress must be managed by a formal process within a multidisciplinary consortium.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Beauchamp, T.L., Childress J.F. (2009), Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Oxford University Press, Inc.

  2. Obama proposes brain mapping project (2013). http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22007007, accessed April 2013.

  3. Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2012). Novel neurotechnologies: intervening in the brain, http://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/neurotechnology, accessed April 2013.

  4. Farah M.J. (2011). Neuroscience and neuroethics in the 21st century. In J. Illes and B.J. Sahakian (Eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. Oxford University Press.

  5. Vlek, R.J., D. Steines, D. Szibbo, A. Kübler, M.J. Schneider, P. Haselager, et al. 2012. Ethical issues in Brain–Computer interface research, development, and dissemination. Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy 36(2): 94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. FP7-BRAIN project (2012), http://www.brain-project.org, accessed April 2013.

  7. McCullagh P. J., Ware M., Mulvenna M., Lightbody G., Nugent C. D., & McAllister H. G. (2010). Can Brain Computer Interfaces Become Practical Assistive Devices in the Community? In: Medinfo 2010, Cape Town, IOS Press. 5 pp.

  8. University of Ulster Research Governance, http://research.ulster.ac.uk/rg/, accessed April 2013.

  9. Graimann B., Allison B., and Pfurtscheller G. (2010) Brain–Computer Interfaces: A Gentle Introduction in B. Graimann et al. (eds.), Brain–Computer Interfaces, The Frontiers Collection, DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-02091-9_1, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.

  10. Millán J.R., Rupp R., Müller-Putz G., Murray-Smith R., Giugliemma C., Tangermann M., Vidaurre C., Cincotti F., Kübler A. & Leeb R. (2010), Combining Brain–Computer Interfaces and Assistive Technologies: State-of-the-Art and Challenges, Frontiers in Neuroscience, vol 4, article 161, p1-15, 2010.

  11. Wolpaw, J.R., N. Birbaumer, D.J. McFarland, G. Pfurtscheller, and T.M. Vaughan. 2002. Brain–computer interfaces for communication and control. Clinical Neurophysiology 113: 767–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Nijholt A., Reuderink B. & Oude Bos D. (2009), Turning shortcomings into challenges: Brain-computer interfaces for games, Intelligent Technologies for Interactive Entertainment, Springer, pp. 153–168

  13. Sellers, E.W., T.M. Vaughan, and J.R. Wolpaw. 2010. A brain-computer interface for long-term independent home use. Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis 11: 449–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Buch, E., C. Weber, L.G. Cohen, C. Braun, M.A. Dimyan, T. Ard, J. Mellinger, A. Caria, S. Soekadar, A. Fourkas, and N. Birbaumer. 2008. Think to move: A neuromagnetic brain-computer interface (BCI) system for chronic stroke. Stroke 39: 910–917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Pineda, J., D. Brang, E. Hecht, L. Edwards, S. Carey, M. Bacon, C. Futagaki, D. Suk, J. Tom, C. Birnbaum, and A. Rork. 2008. Positive behavioral and electrophysiological changes following neurofeedback training in children with autism. Res Autism Spect Disord 2: 557–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Zander, T.O., M. Gaertner, C. Kothe, and R. Vilimek. 2011. Combining Eye Gaze Input With a Brain-Computer Interface for Touchless Human-Computer Interaction. Int. J. Hum-Comput. Int. 27: 38–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Prentice S. and Fenn J., Hype cycle for human-computer interaction: Gartner, 2011

  18. British Psychological Society (2004), Guidelines for minimum standards of ethical approval in psychological research, http://www.bps.org.uk/what-we-do/ethics-standards/ethics-standards, accessed April 2013.

  19. Faden RR, Beauchamp TL, King NM (1986) A history and theory of informed consent. Oxford University Press on Demand

  20. Clausen, J. 2009. Man, machine and in between. Nature 457(26): 1080–1081.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Wolpe P.R., (2007) Ethical and social challenges of brain-computer interfaces. Virtual Mentor 9:128–131. http://virtualmentor.ama-assn.org/2007/02/msoc1-0702.html, accessed April 2013.

  22. Nijboer F. and Broermann U. (2010) Brain-Computer Interfaces for Communication and Control in Locked-in Patients, In Eds: B. Graimann, G. Pfurtscheller, B. Allison: Brain-Computer Interfaces, pp185-201, Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2010.

  23. Allison, B. (2011), Future BNCI Roadmap, http://future-bnci.org/images/stories/Future_BNCI_Roadmap.pdf, accessed April 2013.

  24. Tamburrini, G. 2009. Brain to computer communication: Ethical perspectives on interaction models. Neuroethics 2(3): 137–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Unesco Chair in Bioethics (2003). Informed Consent, http://www.unesco-chair-bioethics.org/UI/F0101.aspx?uid=F8CC42FAE5B3EDA4, accessed April 2013.

  26. Kübler, A., and N. Birbaumer. 2008. Brain-computer interfaces and communication in paralysis: Extinction of goal directed thinking in completely paralysed patients? Clinical Neurophysiology 119(11): 2658–2666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Haselager, P., R. Vlek, J. Hill, and F. Nijboer. 2009. A note on ethical aspects of BCI. Neural Networks 22: 1352–1357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Nijboer, F., Clausen, J., Allison B. Z., & Haselager P. (2011a), The asilomar survey: Stakeholders’ opinions on ethical issues related to brain-computer interfacing. Neuroethics,, 1–38

  29. Allison, B. (2011), Trends in BCI research: progress today, backlash tomorrow? Crossroads, The ACM Magazine for Students - Neuroscience and Computing: Technology on the Brain, Vol 18 (1), 18–22, 2011. ACM New York

  30. Leigh R. Hochberg, Kim D. Anderson (2012), BCI Users and Their Needs. In: J. Wolpaw and E. Winter Wolpaw (Eds.) Brain–Computer Interfaces: Principles and Practice. Oxford Scholarship Online: May 2012 DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195388855.003.0019

  31. Grübler G. (2011), Beyond the responsibility gap. discussion note on responsibility and liability in the use of brain-computer interfaces. AI & Society,, 1–6.

  32. Farah, M.J. 2012. Neuroethics: The Ethical, Legal and Societal Impact of Neuroscience. Annual Review of Psychology 63: 571–591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. ABC news (2013), Day’s brain training boosts his golf form, http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-06/days-brain-training-boosts-his-golf-form/4555902, accessed April 2013.

  34. Nijboer, F., J. Clausen, B.Z. Allison, and P. Haselager. 2011. Researchers’ opinions about ethically sound dissemination of BCI research to the public media. International Journal of Bioelectromagnetism 13(3): 108–109. International Society for Bioelectromagnetism.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Volosyak, I., D. Valbuena, T. Lüth, T. Malechka, and A. Gräser. 2011. BCI Demographics II: How Many (and What Kinds of) People Can Use a High-Frequency SSVEP BCI? IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and and Rehabilitation Engineering 19(3): 232–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Neuper C., Pfurtscheller G. (2010), Electroencephalographic characteristics during motor imagery. In A. Guillot and C. Collet (eds.): The neurophysiological foundations of mental and motor imagery (Chapter 2), Oxford 2010.

  37. Cedar Foundation (2013), http://www.cedar-foundation.org/, accessed April 2013.

  38. TMSI http://www.tmsi.com, accessed April 2013.

  39. Volosyak, I., D. Valbuena, T. Malechka, J. Peuscher, and A. Gräser. 2010. Brain-computer Interface Using Water-based Electrodes. Journal of Neural Engineering 7: 066007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Garcia-Molina, G., and V. Mihajlovic. 2010. Spatial filters to detect Steady State Visual Evoked Potentials elicited by high frequency stimulation: BCI application. Journal of Biomedizinische Technik/Biomedical Engineering 3(55): 173–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Kus, R., D. Valbuena, J. Zygierewicz, T. Malechka, A. Graser, and P. Durka. 2012. Asynchronous BCI based on motor imagery with automated calibration and neurofeedback training. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and and Rehabilitation Engineering 20(6):823–35.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Blain-Moraes, S., R. Schaff, K.L. Gruis, J.E. Huggins, and P.A. Wren. 2012. Barriers to and mediators of brain–computer interface user acceptance: Focus group findings. Ergonomics 55(5): 516–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Bauby JD (1988) The diving bell and the butterfly: A memoir of life in death. Jeremy Leggatt (Translator), Vintage Books; 1st Vintage International edition

  44. BBC news website (2013) Nicklinson case is about ‘right to kill’, says Royal College of Physicians, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19287568, accessed April 2013.

  45. Intendix. (www.intendix.com), accessed April 2013.

  46. Brain Communication Foundation (2013), www.braincommunication.org/index.php, accessed April 2013.

  47. Lightbody G., Ware M., McCullagh P., Mulvenna M., Thomson E., Martin S. (2010), A user centred approach for developing brain-computer interfaces. Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare (Pervasive Health), 2010 4th International Conference on-, pp. 1-8.

  48. Ware, M.P., McCullagh, P.J., McRoberts, A., Lightbody, G., Nugent, C.D., McAllister, G. Mulvenna, M. D. 2010. Contrasting levels of accuracy in command interaction sequences for a domestic brain-computer interface using SSVEP. Biomedical Engineering Conference (CIBEC), 2010 5th Cairo International, 150-153

  49. Hildz E., (2009), Ethical and legal aspects of direct brain-computer-interaction in present research and future application (personal communication).

  50. Ehlers, J., I. Volosyak, and T. Lüth. 2010. Toward a BCI Wizard. In Methods and applications in automation, ed. A. Gräser and D. Ristic-Durrant, 65–73. Aachen: Shaker Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Illes, J., M.P. Kirschen, E. Edwards, L.R. Stanford, P. Bandettini, M.K. Cho, P.J. Ford, G.H. Glover, J. Kulynych, R. Macklin, D.B. Michael, and S.M. Wolf. 2006. Incidental Findings in Brain Imaging Research: What should happen when a researcher sees a potential health problem in a brain scan from a research subject? Science. 311(5762): 783–784.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Back Home http://www.backhome-fp7.eu/ Brain-neural computer interfaces on track to home – Development of a practical generation of BNCI for independent home use, accessed April 2013.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computing and Mathematics, University of Ulster, Shore Road, Newtownabbey, BT37 0QB, UK

    Paul McCullagh & Gaye Lightbody

  2. Wydział Fizyki, Uniwersytet Warszawski, Hoża 69, 00 681, Warszawa, Poland

    Jaroslaw Zygierewicz

  3. School of Nursing, University of Ulster, Shore Road, Newtownabbey, BT37 0QB, UK

    W. George Kernohan

Authors
  1. Paul McCullagh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gaye Lightbody
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jaroslaw Zygierewicz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. W. George Kernohan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul McCullagh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McCullagh, P., Lightbody, G., Zygierewicz, J. et al. Ethical Challenges Associated with the Development and Deployment of Brain Computer Interface Technology. Neuroethics 7, 109–122 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-013-9188-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-013-9188-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation