ArticlePloS one2013
Impact of contextual factors and substance characteristics on perspectives toward cognitive enhancement.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
24 citing papers in PubMed, 70 citations in OpenAlex.
- Individual differences and motives for the acceptance of cognitive enhancement: A mixed-methods investigation.PloS one · 2026Article
- What Drives the Non-Medical Use of Stimulants Among College Students? The Role of Self-Efficacy and Attitudes: A Cross-Sectional Study of Israeli Undergraduates.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2025Article
- Ginkgo Biloba as a niche theme cognitive enhancer agent, 1420 dokumen of Scopus database. A bibliometric study from 1988 to 2024.F1000Research · 2025Article
- Adapting Ourselves, Instead of the Environment: An Inquiry into Human Enhancement for Function and Beyond.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2024Article
- The rising use of cognitive enhancement drugs and predictors of use during COVID-19: findings from a cross-sectional survey of students and university staff in the UK.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Cooperative behavior in the workplace: Empirical evidence from the agent-deed-consequences model of moral judgment.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Article
- Parents' Perceptions on the Debated Parenting Practice of Cognitive Enhancement in Healthy Children and Adolescents.Journal of cognitive enhancement : towards the integration of theory and practice · 2022Article
- Cognitive Enhancement: Unanswered Questions About Human Psychology and Social Behavior.Science and engineering ethics · 2021Article
- Understanding the relationship between safety beliefs and knowledge for cognitive enhancers in UK university students.PloS one · 2021Article
- The Dark Triad of personality and attitudes toward cognitive enhancement.BMC psychology · 2020Article
- How perceived substance characteristics affect ethical judgement towards cognitive enhancement.PloS one · 2019Article
- Use and Propensity to Use Substances as Cognitive Enhancers in Italian Medical Students.Brain sciences · 2018Article
- Moral Attitudes Toward Pharmacological Cognitive Enhancement (PCE): Differences and Similarities Among Germans With and Without PCE Experience.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2018Article
- Deciphering moral intuition: How agents, deeds, and consequences influence moral judgment.PloS one · 2018Article
- Bottom Up Ethics - Neuroenhancement in Education and Employment.Neuroethics · 2018Article
- Towards a Moral Ecology of Pharmacological Cognitive Enhancement in British Universities.Neuroethics · 2017Article
- Moral and social reasons to acknowledge the use of cognitive enhancers in competitive-selective contexts.BMC medical ethics · 2016Article
- Why is Cognitive Enhancement Deemed Unacceptable? The Role of Fairness, Deservingness, and Hollow Achievements.Frontiers in psychology · 2016Article
- Using Caffeine Pills for Performance Enhancement. An Experimental Study on University Students' Willingness and Their Intention to Try Neuroenhancements.Frontiers in psychology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Enhancing cognitive performance with substances--especially prescription drugs--is a fiercely debated topic among scholars and in the media. The empirical basis for these discussions is limited, given that the actual nature of factors that influence the acceptability of and willingness to use cognitive enhancement substances remains unclear. In an online factorial survey, contextual and substance-specific characteristics of substances that improve academic performance were varied experimentally and presented to respondents. Students in four German universities rated their willingness to use and moral acceptance of different substances for cognitive enhancement. We found that the overall willingness to use performance enhancing substances is low. Most respondents considered the use of these substances as morally unacceptable. Situational influences such as peer pressure, policies concerning substance use, relative performance level of peers, but also characteristics of the substance, such as perceptions of substance safety, shape the willingness and acceptability of using a substance to enhance academic performance. Among the findings is evidence of a contagion effect meaning that the willingness was higher when the respondents have more CE drug users in their social network. We also found deterrence effects from strong side effects of using the substance, as well as from policy regulations and sanctions. Regulations might activate social norms against usage and sanctions can be seen as costly to users. Moreover, enhancement substances seem to be most tempting to low performers to catch up with others compared to high performers. By identifying contextual factors and substance characteristics influencing the willingness and acceptability of cognitive enhancers, policy approaches could consider these insights to better manage the use of such substances.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.