Data and Consent Issues with Neural Recording Devices

Research-driven technology developments in the neurosciences present interesting and potentially complicated issues concerning data in general and, more specifically, brain data. The data that is produced from neural recordings is unlike names and addresses in that it may be produced involuntarily, and it can be processed and reprocessed for different aims. Its similarity with names, addresses, etc. is that it can be used to identify persons. The collection, retention, processing, storage and destruction of brain data are of high ethical importance. In terms of policy, as one strand of a broader fabric of measures to cope with this, we can ask: is current data protection regulation adequate in dealing with emerging data concerns that relate to consumer neurotechnology and consent?

[1]  Andrew J. Rohm,et al.  Consumers' Protection of Online Privacy and Identity , 2004 .

[2]  Gregory A. Worrell,et al.  Electrophysiological Biomarkers of Epilepsy , 2014, Neurotherapeutics.

[3]  Pieter R. Roelfsema,et al.  Mind Reading and Writing: The Future of Neurotechnology , 2018, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[4]  T H Monk,et al.  The effects of age and gender on sleep EEG power spectral density in the middle years of life (ages 20-60 years old). , 2001, Psychophysiology.

[5]  Guido Caldarelli,et al.  Mapping social dynamics on Facebook: The Brexit debate , 2017, Soc. Networks.

[6]  James Shanahan,et al.  Social media cultivating perceptions of privacy: A 5-year analysis of privacy attitudes and self-disclosure behaviors among Facebook users , 2018, New Media Soc..

[7]  Konrad P Kording,et al.  How advances in neural recording affect data analysis , 2011, Nature Neuroscience.

[8]  K. Steinsbekk,et al.  Broad consent versus dynamic consent in biobank research: Is passive participation an ethical problem? , 2013, European Journal of Human Genetics.

[9]  Steffen Steinert,et al.  Wired Emotions: Ethical Issues of Affective Brain–Computer Interfaces , 2019, Science and Engineering Ethics.

[10]  P. Prinsloo,et al.  Big Data, Higher Education and Learning Analytics: Beyond Justice, Towards an Ethics of Care , 2017 .

[11]  D. Boyd,et al.  CRITICAL QUESTIONS FOR BIG DATA , 2012 .

[12]  Willem F. G. Haselager,et al.  Identifying Criteria for the Evaluation of the Implications of Brain Reading for Mental Privacy , 2017, Science and Engineering Ethics.

[13]  Michael Morrison,et al.  Dynamic consent: a patient interface for twenty-first century research networks , 2014, European Journal of Human Genetics.

[14]  J. Ojemann,et al.  Informed consent in implantable BCI research: identification of research risks and recommendations for development of best practices , 2016, Journal of neural engineering.

[15]  Xiaoqian Jiang,et al.  iCONCUR: informed consent for clinical data and bio-sample use for research , 2016, AMIA.

[16]  Hazem Refai,et al.  Predicting Age From Brain EEG Signals—A Machine Learning Approach , 2018, Front. Aging Neurosci..

[17]  W. Glannon.  Brain-computer interfaces in end-of-life decision-making , 2016 .

[18]  Wei Fan,et al.  Mining big data: current status, and forecast to the future , 2013, SKDD.

[19]  Luciano Floridi,et al.  The Ethics of Big Data: Current and Foreseeable Issues in Biomedical Contexts , 2015, Science and Engineering Ethics.

[20]  B. Allison,et al.  The Asilomar Survey: Stakeholders’ Opinions on Ethical Issues Related to Brain-Computer Interfacing , 2011, Neuroethics.

[21]  Mark A. Rothstein,et al.  Ethical Issues in Big Data Health Research: Currents in Contemporary Bioethics , 2015, Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics.

[22]  J. E. Alexander,et al.  Cerebral lateralization in homosexual males: a preliminary EEG investigation. , 1993, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[23]  Vivek Prabhakaran,et al.  Case report: post-stroke interventional BCI rehabilitation in an individual with preexisting sensorineural disability , 2014, Front. Neuroeng..

[24]  Jarrod A. Lewis-Peacock,et al.  Closed-loop brain training: the science of neurofeedback , 2017, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[25]  Robert T. Thibault,et al.  Mind-Reading or Misleading? Assessing Direct-to-Consumer Electroencephalography (EEG) Devices Marketed for Wellness and Their Ethical and Regulatory Implications , 2018, Journal of Cognitive Enhancement.

[26]  Dustin Scheinost,et al.  The individual functional connectome is unique and stable over months to years , 2017, NeuroImage.