1 resultado para Moral judgements
em ArchiMeD - Elektronische Publikationen der Universität Mainz - Alemanha
Resumo:
Pharmacological cognitive enhancement (CE) is a topic of increasing public awareness. In the scientific literature on studentrnuse of CE as a study aid for academic performance enhancement, there are high prevalence rates regarding the use ofrncaffeinated substances (coffee, caffeinated drinks, caffeine tablets) but remarkably lower prevalence rates regarding the usernof illicit/prescription stimulants such as amphetamines or methylphenidate. While the literature considers the reasons andrnmechanisms for these different prevalence rates from a theoretical standpoint, it lacks empirical data to account for healthyrnstudents who use both, caffeine and illicit/prescription stimulants, exclusively for the purpose of CE. Therefore, wernextensively interviewed a sample of 18 healthy university students reporting non-medical use of caffeine as well as illicit/rnprescription stimulants for the purpose of CE in a face-to-face setting about their opinions regarding differences in generalrnand morally-relevant differences between caffeine and stimulant use for CE. 44% of all participants answered that there is arngeneral difference between the use of caffeine and illicit/prescription stimulants for CE, 28% did not differentiate, 28% couldrnnot decide. Furthermore, 39% stated that there is a moral difference, 56% answered that there is no moral difference andrnone participant was not able to comment on moral aspects. Participants came to their judgements by applying threerndimensions: medical, ethical and legal. Weighing the medical, ethical and legal aspects corresponded to the students’rnindividual preferences of substances used for CE. However, their views only partly depicted evidence-based medical aspectsrnand the ethical issues involved. This result shows the need for well-directed and differentiated information to prevent thernpotentially harmful use of illicit or prescription stimulants for CE.