Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40433357›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroergonomics2025

Wearables for tracking mental state in the classroom: ethical considerations from the literature and high school students.

Anke Snoek, Anne-Marie Brouwer, Ivo V Stuldreher, Pim Haselager, Dorothee Horstkötter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroergonomics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Anke SnoekPsychiatry, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Anne-Marie BrouwerHuman Performance, Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO), Soesterberg, Netherlands.
Ivo V StuldreherHuman Performance, Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO), Soesterberg, Netherlands.
Pim HaselagerDonders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Dorothee HorstkötterHealth, Ethics and Society, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Educational practice increasingly makes use of technology to improve teaching and learning. New wearable technology is being developed that measures mental states like attention and stress, through neurophysiological signals like electroencephalography (EEG), electrodermal activity (EDA) and heart rate. However, little is known about the ethical aspects of this technology. Methodology: We provide an overview of current ethical considerations on such wearable technologies in classroom settings and analyze these critically. We distinguished three ethical angles to analyze new technologies: epistemic, principle-based, and Foucauldian. We focus on a Foucauldian analysis, outlining how such technologies affect power relationships and self-understanding, but also which responses people develop to evade power. In addition, a focus group of high school students was set up to identify young people's views on such wearable technology and to initiate a reflection on the theory-based ethical considerations. Results: Our study shows that although wearables may provide information on learning and attention, and even though possible users are enthusiastic about the potential, there are several risks of applying such technologies in educational settings. These risks concern governance and surveillance, normalization and exclusion, placing technology before pedagogy, stimulating neoliberal values and quantified self-understanding, and possible negative impact on identity for those who think they are outside of the norm. High school students highlighted that people are not only subjected to new technologies, but also subject these technologies to their own goals. Discussion: We end with a discussion on the perils of implementing new technologies, and provide an alternative to prohibition in the form of co-creating and educating. Any potential future implementation of mental state tracking technology is to be accompanied by normative discussions on legitimate aims, on rights, interests and needs of both pupils, teachers, and educational institutions, taking broader debates on what should count as a good pedagogical climate into account.

Indexed as

educationempirical bioethicsethicsFoucaultmental state trackingphysiologywearables

Identifiers

PMID40433357
PMCPMC12106337

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.