Nudge symposium proceedings

The current issue of the European Journal of Risk Regulation has the proceedings of a symposium on nudging, and it contains a set of insightful papers. The introduction by the editor says it best.

The EJRR starts the new year by hosting a pioneering symposium devoted to one of the latest policy innovations that is currently experimented in the United Kingdom and the United States: the ubiquitous, yet controversial, Nudge. This idea originates from the homonymous, 2008 best-selling book published by the economist Richard Thaler and the legal scholar Cass Sunstein. By building upon the findings of behavioural research, they refute the classic economic assumption that “each of us thinks and chooses unfailingly well”1 and they advocate the need for public authorities to nudge people to make decisions that serve their own long-term interests without however removing their right to choose.

At a time in which governments are taking considerable interest in the use of nudging, we have asked some of the leading authors who have already contributed to the literature surrounding the regulatory innovations, generally referred as New Governance, to share their ideas on this appealing regulatory approach.

In his opening essay, Nudging Healthy Lifestyles, Adam Burgess provides a critical assessment of the introduction of behavioural, nudging approaches to correct lifestyle behaviours in the UK. His thought-provoking analysis triggered a lively debate that has been framed along the subsequent essays signed by On Amir and Orly Lobel, Evan Selinger and Kyle Powys White, Alberto Alemanno and Luc Bovens.

The article by Alberto Alemanno, Managing Editor of the European Journal of Risk Regulation is a fulsome account of the propriety of nudging in the case of tobacco control (recently highlighted by Roland on these pages); that nudging in this instance overcomes many of the objections that are raised in the other contributions to the symposium.

I also liked Selinger & White’s analysis of nudging in the context of Brad Allenby and Dan Sarewitz’s insight on the three levels by which we should view technological fixes (as articulated in their excellent book The Techno-Human Condition, which I have written about before). In particular, they point out the naiveté of only considering shop-floor arguments, a topic we will return to again.

Hat tip to Marleen Eijkholt for alerting me to this symposium.

Image credit: Transcapitalist

Cognitive training as a bona fide therapeutic

The New Scientist reports that Brain Plasticity, Inc. a developer of cognitive training games, has entered into discussions with the FDA to market one of its brain training software packages as a bona fide therapeutic. The issue is of interest on many accounts, and the New Scientist article covers many of the obvious ones that were discussed at the Entertainment Software and Cognitive Neurotherapeutics Society meeting held last week in San Francisco.  Noteworthy among them are the hope that FDA approval will bring validity to a field that has both serious practitioners and charlatans others who cut corners, as well as the concern that FDA approval might slow down progress, as the approval process is likely to be glacial compared to the pace of change in software development.

But if we unpack this a bit, we find that there are deeper levels of significance, and at least one of these are is worthy of further discussion.

Call for Papers: International Neuroethics Conference “Neuroenhancement”

 University of Mainz, Germany

July 7-9, 2011

This conference on Neuroenhancement will be the final conference of the Canadian-German research project “Normality, Normalization and Enhancement in the Neurosciences: Ethical, Sociocultural and Neuropsychiatric Aspects of Cognitive Enhancement”.  The aim of the conference is to provide a forum for the interdisciplinary discussion of medical, ethical, social and legal aspects of neuroenhancement. In addition, during the conference, the results of the research project “Normality, Normalization and Enhancement in the Neurosciences” will be presented.

Generation Expectation

Over at Disruptive Demographics, Joseph Coughlin, Director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology AgeLab, talk about Generation Expectation as part of a forum on “What’s Next? How Technology will Revolutionize the Boomer Generation”.  Coughlin’s video argues that it is not the baby boomers numbers, not their wealth, not their experiences, nor their education that are worth paying attention to, but how these factors converge together to contribute to create Generation Expectation, composed of people who expect to live longer and to live better. Notice that he does not think that they expect to live forever (i.e. they are not transhumanists) nor does he think that they will want to pursue radical enhancements.  However, they will be amenable to using technology to improve their lives. The ability of this generation to drive trends in North America has been a defining feature of the last 50 years; it is likely that they will continue to do so, with everything from cognitive enhancers (writ large) to social media.  As Coughlin says, “the new expectations of the next generation of old will drive markets and demand innovations in products, services and public policy.”

Link to Disruptive Demographics.

2011 Sharp Brains Summit

Registration is now open for the 2011 Sharp Brains Summit (full disclosure – I am a speaker this year). Sharp Brains is an organization that follows the business of brain fitness software and is primarily dedicated to promoting the business model of selling software.  At the same time, Alvaro and his team are quite serious about highlighting the best ways that we can improve our brains (non-pharmacologically, that is), and the information that Sharp Brains provides is not only intriguing but often practical. If you are at all interested in the latest and greatest in this rapidly growing field, by all means attend.

Even better, you don’t have to go anywhere!!  This is a virtual conference, so all that you need is a computer (you need to be  able to run Flash, but if you can watch YouTube videos, you are all set) to attend from the comfort of your own home or office.  I attended the 2010 Summit, and it was remarkably effective – not only did it save travel expenses and time for me (not to mention that it was environmentally responsible), but it turned out that the virtual conference had an advantage over in-person conferences in one way. Most people have had the experience that some of the most valuable discussions at conferences occur not from the podium but in the hallway. The virtual conference software allows for hallway conversations, but the bulk of that conversation occurs as a public comment stream. Getting to hear what many people are saying in the ‘hallway’ is much better than hearing only one person, and if you like what they say, you can send them a note and continue your conversation as a private one.

For the full list of speakers, go here.

For a brief intro to virtual conferences, go here.

No need to shut off the phone…it does it itself!

There is a fascinating article in the NY Times about how cell phone carriers are experimenting with technology that prevents phones from ringing when they are in a moving car.  This is an idea that I first heard about a couple of months ago when I had a conference call with a group of scientists who study attention – in particular the next generation of the phone being one that distinguishes between the driver and passenger.

Overall, the idea of harnessing our technology so that it works with us rather than against us is one whose time has come.  If you are interested in such issues, you might want to head down to Silicon Valley next month to the Wisdom 2.0 conference which is developed around the following remise: “Will we live increasingly distracted and hurried — or can we live mindfully and wisely, and engage the great technologies of our age in ways that benefit us, our society, and world?”  I won’t be attending this year, but there is an all-star lineup of speakers, and if it is anything like last year’s event, it is sure to satisfy those who want to remain calm while remaining technoprogressive.

Link to the New York Times article on cell phones that turn off in the car

Link to the Wisdom 2.0 conference.

Penn Neuroscience Boot Camp

The University of Pennsylvania announces their 3rd annual Neuroscience Boot Camp, July 31-August 10!

Why Neuroscience Boot Camp? Neuroscience is increasingly relevant to a number of professions and academic disciplines beyond its traditional medical applications.  Lawyers, educators, economists and businesspeople, as well as scholars of philosophy, sociology, applied ethics and policy, are incorporating the concepts and methods of neuroscience into their work.  Indeed, for any field in which it is important to understand, predict or influence human behavior, neuroscience will play an increasing role.

The Penn Neuroscience Boot Camp gives participants a basic foundation in cognitive and affective neuroscience and equips them to be informed consumers of neuroscience research.

What happens at Neuroscience Boot Camp?  Through a combination of lectures, break-out groups, panel discussions and laboratory visits, participants will gain an understanding of the methods of neuroscience and key findings on the cognitive and social-emotional functions of the brain, lifespan development and disorders of brain function. Each lecture will be followed by extensive Q&A.  Break-out groups allow participants to delve more deeply into topics of relevance to their fields. Laboratory visits will include trips to an MRI scanner, an EEG/ERP lab, an animal neurophysiology lab, and a transcranial magnetic stimulation lab. Participants will also have access to an extensive online library of copyrighted materials selected for relevance to the Boot Camp, including classic and review articles and textbook chapters in cognitive and affective neuroscience and the applications of neuroscience to diverse fields.  Seehttp://lawneuro.typepad.com/the-law-and-neuroscience-blog/2009/08/bloggin-from-boot-camp-day-one.html for a daily blog post from our first Boot Camp.

Who should apply? College and university faculty, working professionals and graduate students are encouraged to apply.  The only prerequisites are a grasp of basic statistics and at least a dim recollection of high school biology and physics.  (A short set of readings will be made available prior to the Boot > Camp to remind you about the essentials.)

More details: Participants will be housed on campus in air-conditioned apartment-style suites with private bedrooms.  Sessions begin at 8:30 AM and end at 5:15. Breakfast and lunch will be eaten with the group; dinners are on your own. The academic program spans nine days, Monday, August 1st – Wednesday, August 10th with half of Saturday and all of Sunday off.  There will be an opening reception on the evening of Sunday July 31st and a gala dinner on the last evening.

The cost of tuition, room and board is $4,500; limited scholarship support is available.  Complete applications are due by midnight on February 1st.  You will be notified of the status of your application by March 7th, and will have until April 1st to confirm attendance.

Visit http://neuroethics.upenn.edu/index.php/events/neuroscience-bootcamp for more information!

Brain Matters 2 – Call for abstracts

Brain Matters 2, a conference to be held May 26-27 in Montreal, has issued a call for abstracts (due date is February 1, 2011). The theme of the conference is ethics in the translation of neuroscience research to psychiatric and neurological care.  Full details can be found here.

Conflict of Interest in Psychiatry – Lecture by Thomas Insel at the 2010 Neuroethics Society Meeting

Thomas Insel, Director of the National Institutes of Mental Health, gave a plenary address to the Neuroethics Society on Saturday entitled “Conflict of Interest in Psychiatry”.  Using data provided by the PharmedOut, a Georgetown University Medical Center-based project that empowers physicians to identify and counter inappropriate pharmaceutical promotion practices, Dr. Insel walked through a series of observations that suggest that psychiatry is particularly heavily targeted, and influenced, by the pharmaceutical industry.  Among the eye-popping observations that were shared were these:

Of 394 physicians who received over $100,000 from the pharmaceutical industry, 116 were psychiatrists, well out of proportion to the percentage of psychiatrists in medical practice.

Antipsychotics are the top-selling class of drugs in the United States, with sales of $14.6B.  What is most remarkable about this observation is that the older antipsychotics, which are no longer protected by patents, are of equal or superior effectiveness to the current crop of second-generation antipsychotics, but physicians prescribe the new ones at a huge cost to society.

An important observation that I had never heard before was that disclosure of conflict of interest is not the same as lack of conflict of interest.  Dr. Insel cited the work of George Loewenstein and his colleagues who report that,

Call for Abstracts: An interdisciplinary conference on cognitive enhancement for young scholars

Call for Abstracts: An interdisciplinary conference on cognitive enhancement for young scholars

21 February – 1 March 2011

University of Mainz, Germany

The conference will provide a forum for young scholars, post-docs and Ph.D. students from Europe and Canada interested in medical, societal and ethical issues of cognitive enhancement. This event is sponsored by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF).

During the conference, 15 participants from different disciplines will have the opportunity to present their work and to discuss issues related to cognitive enhancement with renowned international experts.

The scientific programme will consist of oral presentations by the 15 participating young scholars, keynote lectures and a panel discussion. In addition, a hands-on day will be held at the Psychiatric Clinic, University Medical Center, Mainz.

Who should apply?

Young scholars, post-docs and Ph.D. students from disciplines such as neurosciences, medicine, psychology, theory of medicine, philosophy, biomedical ethics, neuroethics, law, theology and the social sciences, interested in an interdisciplinary debate on cognitive enhancement.

Accommodation and travel expenses will be provided.

Participants will receive an additional expense allowance of 300 € for preparing and submitting their manuscript for inclusion in the conference proceedings. In order to allow for a timely publication, it will be necessary that the participants submit their manuscripts within four weeks after the conference.

Please send your application with an abstract of your presentation (max. 500 words), a short curriculum vitae and a list of publications to

PD Dr. Elisabeth Hildt

Department of Philosophy, University of Mainz

Jakob Welder-Weg 18, 55099 Mainz, Germany

Mail: hildt@uni-mainz.de

Deadline for submission of abstracts: 30 November 2010

Outcome of review: 15 December 2010