测试设计生物伦理学方法:比较数字游戏和针对年轻人的神经伦理研究小插图调查。

Q1 Arts and Humanities AJOB Empirical Bioethics Pub Date : 2023-01-01 Epub Date: 2022-08-22 DOI:10.1080/23294515.2022.2110964
David M Lyreskog, Gabriela Pavarini, Edward Jacobs, Vanessa Bennett, Geoffrey Mawdsley, Ilina Singh
{"title":"测试设计生物伦理学方法:比较数字游戏和针对年轻人的神经伦理研究小插图调查。","authors":"David M Lyreskog, Gabriela Pavarini, Edward Jacobs, Vanessa Bennett, Geoffrey Mawdsley, Ilina Singh","doi":"10.1080/23294515.2022.2110964","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Over the last decades, the neurosciences, behavioral sciences, and the social sciences have all seen a rapid development of innovative research methods. The field of bioethics, however, has trailed behind in methodological innovation. Despite the so-called \"empirical turn\" in bioethics, research methodology for project development, data collection and analysis, and dissemination has remained largely restricted to surveys, interviews, and research papers. We have previously argued for a \"Design Bioethics\" approach to empirical bioethics methodology, which develops purpose-built methods for investigation of bioethical concerns. In this paper we compare a research tool created using a design bioethics approach to a \"methods-as-usual\" approach in empirical bioethics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Our study compared dimensions of engagement with a digital game we created, called \"Tracing Tomorrow,\" to a standard vignette survey. The two tools investigated the same subject matter, digital phenotyping for mental health, in a sample of 301 UK adolescents.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants who played the game reported a greater sense of presence, emotional engagement, cognitive absorption, and mental health ethics insight, compared to participants who completed the vignette survey. Perceived authenticity and curiosity/motivation to learn more was equivalent for both methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results of this study highlights the importance of purpose-built methodology for empirical bioethics research.</p>","PeriodicalId":38118,"journal":{"name":"AJOB Empirical Bioethics","volume":"14 1","pages":"55-64"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9612923/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Testing Design Bioethics Methods: Comparing a Digital Game with a Vignette Survey for Neuroethics Research with Young People.\",\"authors\":\"David M Lyreskog, Gabriela Pavarini, Edward Jacobs, Vanessa Bennett, Geoffrey Mawdsley, Ilina Singh\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23294515.2022.2110964\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Over the last decades, the neurosciences, behavioral sciences, and the social sciences have all seen a rapid development of innovative research methods. The field of bioethics, however, has trailed behind in methodological innovation. Despite the so-called \\\"empirical turn\\\" in bioethics, research methodology for project development, data collection and analysis, and dissemination has remained largely restricted to surveys, interviews, and research papers. We have previously argued for a \\\"Design Bioethics\\\" approach to empirical bioethics methodology, which develops purpose-built methods for investigation of bioethical concerns. In this paper we compare a research tool created using a design bioethics approach to a \\\"methods-as-usual\\\" approach in empirical bioethics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Our study compared dimensions of engagement with a digital game we created, called \\\"Tracing Tomorrow,\\\" to a standard vignette survey. The two tools investigated the same subject matter, digital phenotyping for mental health, in a sample of 301 UK adolescents.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants who played the game reported a greater sense of presence, emotional engagement, cognitive absorption, and mental health ethics insight, compared to participants who completed the vignette survey. Perceived authenticity and curiosity/motivation to learn more was equivalent for both methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results of this study highlights the importance of purpose-built methodology for empirical bioethics research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AJOB Empirical Bioethics\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"55-64\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9612923/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AJOB Empirical Bioethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/23294515.2022.2110964\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/8/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJOB Empirical Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23294515.2022.2110964","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/8/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:过去几十年来,神经科学、行为科学和社会科学领域的创新研究方法都得到了快速发展。然而,生命伦理学领域在方法创新方面却落在后面。尽管生物伦理学领域出现了所谓的 "实证转向",但在项目开发、数据收集和分析以及传播方面,研究方法在很大程度上仍然局限于调查、访谈和研究论文。我们曾提出过 "设计生物伦理学 "的生物伦理学实证方法论,即开发专门用于调查生物伦理学问题的方法。在本文中,我们将使用 "设计生物伦理学 "方法创建的研究工具与实证生物伦理学中的 "常规方法 "进行了比较:我们的研究比较了我们制作的名为 "追踪明天 "的数字游戏与标准小故事调查的参与度。这两种工具对相同的主题--心理健康数字表型--进行了调查,调查对象是 301 名英国青少年:结果:与完成小故事调查的参与者相比,玩过游戏的参与者在临场感、情感投入、认知吸收和心理健康伦理洞察力方面都更胜一筹。两种方法的真实感和好奇心/学习动力相当:本研究的结果凸显了有针对性的方法对于生物伦理学实证研究的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Testing Design Bioethics Methods: Comparing a Digital Game with a Vignette Survey for Neuroethics Research with Young People.

Background: Over the last decades, the neurosciences, behavioral sciences, and the social sciences have all seen a rapid development of innovative research methods. The field of bioethics, however, has trailed behind in methodological innovation. Despite the so-called "empirical turn" in bioethics, research methodology for project development, data collection and analysis, and dissemination has remained largely restricted to surveys, interviews, and research papers. We have previously argued for a "Design Bioethics" approach to empirical bioethics methodology, which develops purpose-built methods for investigation of bioethical concerns. In this paper we compare a research tool created using a design bioethics approach to a "methods-as-usual" approach in empirical bioethics.

Methods: Our study compared dimensions of engagement with a digital game we created, called "Tracing Tomorrow," to a standard vignette survey. The two tools investigated the same subject matter, digital phenotyping for mental health, in a sample of 301 UK adolescents.

Results: Participants who played the game reported a greater sense of presence, emotional engagement, cognitive absorption, and mental health ethics insight, compared to participants who completed the vignette survey. Perceived authenticity and curiosity/motivation to learn more was equivalent for both methods.

Conclusion: The results of this study highlights the importance of purpose-built methodology for empirical bioethics research.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
AJOB Empirical Bioethics
AJOB Empirical Bioethics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊最新文献
Enhancing Animals is "Still Genetics": Perspectives of Genome Scientists and Policymakers on Animal and Human Enhancement. Associations Between the Legalization and Implementation of Medical Aid in Dying and Suicide Rates in the United States. Ethics Consultation in U.S. Pediatric Hospitals: Adherence to National Practice Standards. Monitored and Cared for at Home? Privacy Concerns When Using Smart Home Health Technologies to Care for Older Persons. Advance Medical Decision-Making Differs Across First- and Third-Person Perspectives.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1