Cognitive Technologies
About
cognitive technologies
What are cognitive technologies?
Cognition is defined as 'the process by which knowledge and understanding are developed in the mind' (Oxford Learners Dictionary). Cognitive technologies are ‘the realm of technologies that assist, augment or simulate cognitive processes or that can be used for the achievement of cognitive aims’ (Ienca 2018). These include both neurotechnologies, that is technologies that interact with the brain (Brain-computer interface (BCI), implants, transcranial stimulation, pharmaceuticals, etc. ) and Artificial Intelligence (AI), either embedded in neurotechnologies or which simulates intelligence.
Why use them?
Much of the research is still work in progress, however, the purpose of such research is to assist or augment our cognitive capacities. Research is often related to disabilities such as attention deficit, memory loss ( as in Alzheimer's disease), or specific professions that require high levels of focus such as the military. However, if these technologies are shown to work with limited side-effects, why should a wider public not benefit from them, too?
Here is a 15-minute video by Anders Sandberg about cognitive enhancement. Sandberg studies societal and ethical issues surrounding human enhancement and new technologies with a transhumanistic approach. He has a background in computer science, neuroscience, and medical engineering and works at the Future of Humanity Institute, Oxford University. Link to video here.
And an example of how a company is using cognitive technologies in the classroom (3 min). Link to video here.
Isn't this discussion premature?
This reflection is needed whether or not the technology can deliver on its promises. The scientific backing of the technology is weak with no scientific publications regarding the headset and scientists have stated that the findings so far are partial and require further research (Sitaram et al. 2017; Johnson 2017). However, the tech industry is creating imaginaries that will shape future research. ‘Sociotechnical imaginaries are collectively held, institutionally stabilized, and publicly performed visions of desirable futures that are animated by imagined forms of life and made attainable through the design of technological projects’ (Williamson 2017). BrainCo is reinforcing this imaginary by setting it in a historical perspective, from the comparison of the headband to a head ring in the in the 16th-century Chinese mythological story, `Journey to the West`’ (Wang, Shen, and Tai 2019), to the reference to Alan Pope’s research for NASA (NASA Spinoff 2019). The data collection is compared to the current trend of measuring ones physical efforts, transforming it into ‘everyday, mundane’ data (Pink et al. 2017). As what Paju (2019) describes as an embodied future, ‘past, present and future are inseparable’ and feed into each other, leading to a practically pre-determined future. Before this future is realised, we need to understand its implications and the risks that are not mentioned in this imaginary future. It is all the more important to do so now, before the technology becomes widely used as it is then difficult to push back and control or regulate it. Therefore, even if the technology is not yet fully functional, we need to consider the implications of its use in schools.
Healthy Break
Perfect timing for a stretch and glass of water!
References:
Ienca, Marcello. 2018. ‘Democratizing Cognitive Technology: A Proactive Approach’. Ethics and Information Technology; Dordrecht, June, 1–14. http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.is.ed.ac.uk/10.1007/s10676-018-9453-9. (link to abstract)
Johnson, Sidney. 2017. ‘This Company Wants to Gather Student Brainwave Data to Measure “Engagement” - EdSurge News’. EdSurge. 26 October 2017.
NASA Spinoff. 2019. ‘Brainwaves Reveal Student Engagement, Operate Household Objects’.
Paju, Elina. 2019. ‘Futures in Action: Embodied or Empty Futures in Youth Activation Workshops’. Time & Society, April, 0961463X19842474. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961463X19842474. (link to abstract only)
Pink, Sarah, Shanti Sumartojo, Deborah Lupton, and Christine Heyes La Bond. 2017. ‘Mundane Data: The Routines, Contingencies and Accomplishments of Digital Living’. Big Data & Society 4 (1): 2053951717700924. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951717700924.
Sitaram, Ranganatha, Tomas Ros, Luke Stoeckel, Sven Haller, Frank Scharnowski, Jarrod Lewis-Peacock, Nikolaus Weiskopf, et al. 2017. ‘Closed-Loop Brain Training: The Science of Neurofeedback’. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 1 February 2017. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2016.164. (link to abstract only)
Wang, Yifan, Hong Shen, and Crystal Tai. 2019. ‘China’s Efforts to Lead the Way in AI Start in Its Classrooms; A Fast-Spreading Use of Artificial Intelligence in Schools from Kindergartens to Universities Provides the Country with an Unrivaled Database’. Wall Street Journal (Online); New York, N.Y., 24 October 2019, sec. Business.
Learn More...
The science behind these technologies