AJOB Neuroscience最新文献

In this paper I argue that by using methods of encouragement, derived from the fields of social psychology, cognitive neuroscience, and behavioral economics, healthcare workers can potentially provide their patients with tools for increasing adherence to their treatment plans. I claim that the shared decision-making model can, and should, be enriched to include a component that encourages patients to follow through with their plans. It is commonsense that it is one thing to decide on a plan, and quite another to stick to it. Even if a plan is one's own, people often backslide with respect to their prior commitments. I appeal to the extensive literatures on decision-making, delay discounting, and willpower to provide some empirically verified tools for motivating patients. Importantly, I argue that contrary to appearances, motivating others to act with respect to their commitments expresses a respect for autonomy and is non-paternalistic.

Healthcare decisions evaluate treatment risks and benefits, using a shared decision-making process between patient and clinician. Healthcare workers (HCWs) offer treatments based on condition specific evidence and expert knowledge. The patient evaluates treatment choices from their individual perception of how helpful or harmful treatment might be. This is a "risk-taking" decision. Those in a disorder of consciousness (DOC) have unreliable or absent awareness. They cannot participate in the risk-taking decisional process outlined above. Instead, family members and HCWs evaluate the options and determine how much risk is acceptable. We propose this is a distinctly different decisional process called "risk-making," and that for those in a DOC it is influenced by multiple poorly understood factors. The different ways that decisions are made on their behalf may be negatively impacting their healthcare and creating a distributive justice need. A "risk-making" theory of DOC healthcare decision-making was developed via narrative literature review. It aims to explicate the realities of DOC decision-making practices, and surface rarely discussed assumptions and social factors possibly impacting DOC healthcare for discussion and future exploration.

Digital resurrection technologies use artificial intelligence to recreate the voices, images, and personalities of deceased individuals, raising ethical concerns about memory, identity, and respect for the dignity of the deceased. This paper examines key neuroethical challenges, including mental privacy, cognitive liberty, and the authenticity of AI-generated representations. Rather than framing East-West differences as opposing cultural values, the paper identifies shared ethical concerns expressed through diverse practices. It proposes a cross-cultural governance framework based on universal principles: protecting mental privacy, ensuring faithful representations of identity, and preventing exploitation. Practical mechanisms include digital neural wills, tiered regulation based on technology capabilities, and structured family decision-making. By integrating evidence from neuroscience, law, and cultural studies, this framework aims to ensure that digital resurrection technologies support ethical remembrance rather than commodifying identity. Without proactive governance, these technologies risk distorting how societies remember and honor the deceased.