Search results

In this chapter, we overview different neuroenhancement techniques that could be applied for accelerating the learning process in a number of tasks that are associated with occupational roles. The techniques range from: (1) pharmaceutical and invasive methods with limited applicability to the healthy population, due to possible side effects and obtrusiveness; (2) game-based brain training that shows task-specific potential, but may not generalize; and (3) a promising new research direction in which the goal is to “train” the brain to reach an optimal cognitive state for performing a given task, and remain in this state by self-regulation. However, in order to accomplish this goal of brain training, the neurological markers that best discriminate good task performance need to be identified. We also review a number of initial studies in this chapter which have analyzed such markers in a variety of training-related applications for different occupations, such as military/security (e.g., marksmanship, deadly force judgment and decision making, submarine piloting and navigation, phishing detection), medicine (e.g., robot-assisted surgery), banking (e.g., financial traders), sports (e.g., golf, archery, and baseball), or entertainment (e.g., musicians and actors). The promising results of these early studies are fueling interest in neuroscience-based technology and methods in the rapidly developing field of organizational neuroscience (e.g., leadership research). We conclude the chapter with a discussion of future research directions.

Through a review of historically famous cases and a chronicle of neurotechnology development, this chapter discusses brain structure and brain function as two distinct yet interrelated paths to understand the relative contributions of anatomical and physiological mechanisms to the human brain–behavior relationship. From an organizational neuroscience perspective, the chapter describes over a dozen neuroimaging technologies that are classified under four groupings: morphologic, invasive metabolic, noninvasive metabolic, and electromagnetic. We then discuss neuroimaging variables that may be useful in social science investigations, and we underscore electroencephalography as a particularly useful modality for the study of individuals and groups in organizational settings. The chapter concludes by considering emerging science and novel brain technologies for the organizational researcher as we look to the future.

In this introductory chapter, we make the case for the need for a book that explores this nascent field that we label as organizational neuroscience. In so doing, we put the field in an historical context and overview some recent reviews and thought pieces that have touched upon various topics in this emerging discipline. Key arguments for our case include the fact that research methods and paradigms in the organizational sciences could benefit from a consideration of neuroscience issues, and technology has advanced to the point where an infusion of neuroscience methods into organizational research is now highly feasible. In addition, practitioners and practice-oriented media are ready for new approaches and techniques that could utilize neuroscience-based knowledge. Indeed, “C-suite” executives have been willing subjects in many of the studies described in this book and have shown a genuine interest in applying brain-based theories to their own success and to the success of the organizations that they lead. As such, a goal of this book is to begin to connect such emerging knowledge with practice in areas like organizational, employee, and leader development. At the same time, all of the chapters go to great lengths to not get ahead of ourselves in terms of ideas for practice that are not firmly grounded in research. We further place the area of organizational neuroscience in the greater context of related fields, including neuroeconomics and neuromarketing, and we stress the interdisciplinary nature of all of these emerging disciplines. Finally, we overview the remaining chapters and describe how we delineate two parts of the book based on general issues and topical applications, respectively.

While reiterating the benefits of applications of neuroscience to both research and practice, we also acknowledge in this concluding chapter the potential issues that will continually need to be addressed. Specifically, we overview ontological and epistemological concerns, such as the potential for excessive reductionism. We also address ethical issues that could come into play for both researchers and practitioners. Finally, we conclude with a look forward to the future by suggesting that the “approach,” rather than the “avoidance,” of organizational neuroscience is likely to grow over time. One exciting possibility is how an examination of the human brain in work and organizational settings is likely to be a prime example of the “big data” trends that the future will bring.

Emotions and affect continue to garner widespread interest in the organizational sciences, and psychometric instruments tend to be the most often utilized method of assessing emotional phenomena in the workplace. However, psychometric questionnaires/surveys suffer from various shortcomings in that they may not adequately capture the underlying emotional experiences of individuals for various reasons (such as social desirability, lack of awareness, political posturing, and so forth). Neuroscience approaches allow researchers to directly assess the underlying neural activity that is occurring inside individuals’ brains. Accordingly, neuroscience can help researchers to overcome some of the limitations of surveys, thus allowing for both broader conceptualization and measurement. We briefly discuss the various neuroscience methodologies that can be used to help researchers gain insight into how individuals in the workplace experience emotions. Our discussion targets emotional contagion and emotional regulation as two areas that could especially benefit from utilizing a neuroscientific approach. We end the chapter with a consideration of practical implications.

Purpose – To consider the issues of cognitive freedom and neuropolitics via a comparison of d-lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) use in the 1960s and the emerging twenty-first century debate about nootropics.

Design/methodology/approach – Drawing upon theoretical concepts from the study of biopolitics and on the tools of narrative policy analysis, this qualitative analysis uses multiple sources from scientific, mass media, regulatory, and the secondary literature.

Findings – LSD use in the 1950s and 1960s caused an unprecedented social confrontation with the consequences of a key sector in society deciding to use synthetic chemicals to alter personality and consciousness in ways that did not necessarily accord with mainstream society. As such, the era contains key lessons that can inform the new debate about neurological enhancement.

Research limitations/implications – The present study provides a starting point and historical context for development of regulatory policy for the coming era of nootropics and cognitive enhancement.

Originality – This chapter analyzes LSD use in the 1950s and 1960s not as a form of moral panic but as a technological adaptation that raised crucial questions about the possibilities and limits of psychedelic citizenship.

Extant and newly developing techniques and technologies generated by research in brain sciences are characteristically employed in clinical medicine. However, the increasing capabilities conferred by these approaches to access, assess and affect cognition, emotion and behavior render them viable and attractive for engagement beyond the clinical realm, in what are referred to as “dual-use” applications. Definitions of what constitutes dual-use research and applications can vary so as to include utilization in the public sector for lifestyle or wellness purposes – with growing participation of a do-it-yourself (i.e., biohacking) community, and an iterative interest and use in military and warfare operations. Such uses can pose risks to public safety, and challenge research ethics’ principled imperative for non-harm (although while complete avoidance of any harm may be in reality impossible, certainly any/all harms incurred should be minimized). Thus, it is important to both clarify the construct of dual-use brain research and address the ethical issues that such research fosters. This chapter provides a review and clarification of the concept of dual-use brain science, and describes how current and emerging tools and techniques of brain research are actually or potentially employed in settings that threaten public health and incur ethical concerns. Key ethical issues are addressed, and recommendations for ethical guidance of potentially dual-use research are proposed.

This chapter advocates the use of neuroscience theoretical insights and methodological tools to advance existing organizational justice theory, research, and practice. To illustrate the value of neuroscience, two general topics are reviewed. In regard to individual justice, neuroscience makes it clear that organizational justice theory and research needs to integrate both emotion and cognition. Neuroscience also suggests promising avenues for practical individual justice interventions. For other-focused justice, neuroscience clarifies how empathy provides a mechanism for deontic justice while again highlighting the need to consider both emotion and cognition. Neuroscience research into group characterizations also suggests promising explanations for deontic justice failures. We also show how other-focused justice interventions are possible, but more complex, than for self-focused justice. We conclude that interdisciplinary research has great potential to advance both organizational justice and neuroscience research.

This chapter takes the ‘wakefulness promoting’ drug modafinil as an exemplarity case in the sociology of pharmaceutical enhancement. The chapter draws on empirical data collected through 25 interviews with prospective users of modafinil, focusing on two of the ways in which prospective users of modafinil imagined how the drug might be used in their specific social domains: the use of modafinil as a safety tool in the workplace and its use as a study aid by university students. The data presented in this chapter suggests that although a therapy-enhancement dichotomy is a useful heuristic; it could also be limiting to uphold as it may direct attention away from other ways in which uses for new technologies can be positioned, negotiated, realised and resisted by (potential) users in the context of their daily lives.