Literature DB >> 16127858

Judgments of the fairness of using performance enhancing drugs.

John Sabini1, John Monterosso.   

Abstract

Undergraduates (total N=185) were asked about performance-affecting drugs. Some drugs supposedly affected athletic performance, others memory, and other attention. Some improved performance for anyone who took them, others for the top 10% of performers, others for the bottom 10%, and finally, yet other drugs worked only on the bottom 10% who also showed physical abnormalities. Participants were asked about the fairness of allowing the drug to be used, about banning it, and about whether predictions of future performance based on testing with or without the drug were better. The study found that participants appreciated the "interaction effect," that they felt it was less unfair to allow the drug if it affected the bottom 10% than if it affected everyone, and they were more eager to have the drug banned if it affected everyone. Participants were least tolerant of drugs that affected athletic performance and most tolerant of those that affected attention.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Health Care and Public Health

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16127858     DOI: 10.1207/s15327019eb1501_6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ethics Behav        ISSN: 1050-8422


  8 in total

1.  Academic doping or Viagra for the brain? The history of recreational drug use and pharmacological enhancement can provide insight into these uses of neuropharmaceuticals.

Authors:  Jayne C Lucke; Stephanie K Bell; Bradley J Partridge; Wayne D Hall
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2011-02-11       Impact factor: 8.807

2.  Doping use meta-analysis: science seasoned with moralistic prejudice.

Authors:  Ognjen Arandjelović
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 3.  Attitudes toward pharmacological cognitive enhancement-a review.

Authors:  Kimberly J Schelle; Nadira Faulmüller; Lucius Caviola; Miles Hewstone
Journal:  Front Syst Neurosci       Date:  2014-04-17

4.  Smarter Than Thou, Holier Than Thou: The Dynamic Interplay Between Cognitive and Moral Enhancement.

Authors:  Gabriela Pavarini; Alex McKeown; Ilina Singh
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2018-10-29       Impact factor: 5.810

5.  Impact of contextual factors and substance characteristics on perspectives toward cognitive enhancement.

Authors:  Sebastian Sattler; Cynthia Forlini; Eric Racine; Carsten Sauer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-08-05       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  The rationale for consuming cognitive enhancement drugs in university students and teachers.

Authors:  Sebastian Sattler; Carsten Sauer; Guido Mehlkop; Peter Graeff
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-07-17       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  The is and ought of the Ethics of Neuroenhancement: Mind the Gap.

Authors:  Cynthia Forlini; Wayne Hall
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2016-01-08

8.  Would you be willing to zap your child's brain? Public perspectives on parental responsibilities and the ethics of enhancing children with transcranial direct current stimulation.

Authors:  Katy Wagner; Hannah Maslen; Justin Oakley; Julian Savulescu
Journal:  AJOB Empir Bioeth       Date:  2018-02-08
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.