ArticleScience and engineering ethics2020
Brain Recording, Mind-Reading, and Neurotechnology: Ethical Issues from Consumer Devices to Brain-Based Speech Decoding.
Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Information-theoretic and physical constraints on advanced neural signal decoding.Frontiers in systems neuroscience · 2026Article
- Ethical imperatives in the commercialization of brain-computer interfaces.IBRO neuroscience reports · 2025Article
- Does brain-computer interface-based mind reading threaten mental privacy? ethical reflections from interviews with Chinese experts.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Implications of shared motor and perceptual activations on the sensorimotor cortex for neuroprosthetic decoding.Journal of neural engineering · 2025Article
- Sleuthing subjectivity: a review of covert measures of consciousness.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2025Review
- Privacy in perspective: research participants' priorities and concerns related to sharing data generated in human neuroscience studies.Neuroethics · 2025Article
- Brain-based predictive modeling of mind-wandering and involuntary thought: the idiographic approach.Technology, mind, and behavior · 2025Article
- Generative artificial intelligence and ethical considerations in health care: a scoping review and ethics checklist.The Lancet. Digital health · 2024Article
- The speech neuroprosthesis.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2024Review
- Developer perspectives on the ethics of AI-driven neural implants: a qualitative study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The ethical significance of user-control in AI-driven speech-BCIs: a narrative review.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Review
- Development of Korea Neuroethics Guidelines.Journal of Korean medical science · 2023Article
- Semantic reconstruction of continuous language from non-invasive brain recordings.Nature neuroscience · 2023Article
- Imagined speech can be decoded from low- and cross-frequency intracranial EEG features.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Brain reading technologies are rapidly being developed in a number of neuroscience fields. These technologies can record, process, and decode neural signals. This has been described as 'mind reading technology' in some instances, especially in popular media. Should the public at large, be concerned about this kind of technology? Can it really read minds? Concerns about mind-reading might include the thought that, in having one's mind open to view, the possibility for free deliberation, and for self-conception, are eroded where one isn't at liberty to privately mull things over. Themes including privacy, cognitive liberty, and self-conception and expression appear to be areas of vital ethical concern. Overall, this article explores whether brain reading technologies are really mind reading technologies. If they are, ethical ways to deal with them must be developed. If they are not, researchers and technology developers need to find ways to describe them more accurately, in order to dispel unwarranted concerns and address appropriately those that are warranted.
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.