Harvard University.
University of Pennsylvania.
AJOB Neurosci. 2020 Oct-Dec;11(4):224-237. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2020.1811797.
People vary widely in their acceptance of the use of pharmacological cognitive enhancement (CE). We tested the hypothesis that the acceptability of CE is malleable, by varying the context in which CE use takes place, by framing the use of CE with positive and negative metaphors, and by distinguishing between self and other CE use. 2,519 US-based participants completed 2 surveys using Amazon's Mechanical Turk. First, participants responded to vignettes describing a fictional character, which varied by framing metaphor (Pandora's box that releases brain performance vs. key that unlocks brain potential), role/setting (student/educational vs. employee/professional), and activity type (blue vs. white collar). Second, participants viewed personalized vignettes describing their own situations. Across both surveys, participants generally found CE use more acceptable for employees than students, while the effects of framing metaphors were unreliable and smaller than previously reported. People were more accepting of CE use by others than by themselves. Participants also found CE use more acceptable if more peers used CE, the environment was less competitive, and authority figures encouraged CE use. Our findings suggest that opinions about CE are indeed malleable, and concerns that peer pressure, the influence of authority figures, and competition might affect CE use are not unfounded.
人们对药理学认知增强（CE）的接受程度存在很大差异。我们通过改变 CE 发生的背景、使用积极和消极的隐喻来描述 CE 的使用，以及区分自我和他人的 CE 使用，来检验 CE 的可接受性是可以改变的这一假设。2519 名美国参与者使用亚马逊的 Mechanical Turk 完成了 2 项调查。首先，参与者对描述一个虚构角色的情景描述做出反应，这些角色通过框架隐喻（释放大脑表现的潘多拉魔盒与解锁大脑潜力的钥匙）、角色/场景（学生/教育与员工/专业）和活动类型（蓝领与白领）而有所不同。其次，参与者查看了描述自己情况的个性化情景描述。在两项调查中，参与者普遍认为 CE 对员工的使用比学生更能接受，而框架隐喻的影响不可靠，且比之前报道的要小。人们更能接受他人使用 CE，而不是自己使用 CE。如果更多的同行使用 CE、环境竞争不那么激烈、权威人士鼓励使用 CE，参与者也会发现 CE 使用更能接受。我们的研究结果表明，人们对 CE 的看法确实是可以改变的，而且对于同辈压力、权威人士的影响以及竞争可能会影响 CE 使用的担忧并非没有根据。
