Logo: to the web site of Uppsala University

uu.sePublications from Uppsala University
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Salles, Arleen, Ph.D.ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0002-1397-7932
Publications (10 of 39) Show all publications
Rommelfanger, K. S., Ramos, K. M. & Salles, A. (2023). Conceptual conundrums for neuroscience [Letter to the editor]. Neuron, 111(5), 608-609
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Conceptual conundrums for neuroscience
2023 (English)In: Neuron, ISSN 0896-6273, E-ISSN 1097-4199, Vol. 111, no 5, p. 608-609Article in journal, Letter (Other academic) Published
Abstract [en]

Offering conceptual clarity can be a difficult task when scientists are increasingly called to keep up with the broader ecosystem of science communication such as social media and trends to incorporate persuasive writing in federally funded grants. We offer that the inclusion of diverse stakeholder voices and collaborative input that extends beyond the lab would better support the connections between science and society's challenges and opportunities and maximize the potential of science to do good.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2023
Keywords
science communication, public engagement
National Category
Neurosciences Medical Ethics
Research subject
Philosophy
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-497943 (URN)10.1016/j.neuron.2023.02.016 (DOI)000954024700001 ()36863321 (PubMedID)
Funder
EU, Horizon 2020, 945539
Available from: 2023-03-06 Created: 2023-03-06 Last updated: 2023-04-19Bibliographically approved
Ulnicane, I., Mahfoud, T. & Salles, A. (2023). Experimentation, learning and dialogue: an RRI-inspired approach to dual-use of concern. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 10(1), Article ID 2094071.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Experimentation, learning and dialogue: an RRI-inspired approach to dual-use of concern
2023 (English)In: Journal of Responsible Innovation, ISSN 2329-9460, E-ISSN 2329-9037, Vol. 10, no 1, article id 2094071Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Responsible Research and Innovation is promoted by research funders and scientific communities as a way to place societal needs and values at the centre of research and innovation. In practice, however, legal compliance still tends to dominate the RRI agenda. In order to move beyond the dominance of legal compliance and address a broader societal agenda, this article argues that RRI requires: (1) a productive intertwining of research and practice; (2) the integration of anticipation, reflection, engagement, and action (AREA) in a nonlinear process; and (3) an experimental approach. Based on this framework, this article draws on our experience of developing and institutionalizing an RRI-inspired approach to address dual-use and misuse issues in the EU-funded Human Brain Project. Our experience suggests that the four dimensions of the AREA framework work better not as separate stages but rather being flexibly intertwined to enable experimentation, learning, and dialogue.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Routledge, 2023
Keywords
Responsible Research and Innovation, dual-use, AREA framework, experimentation, learning, dialogue
National Category
Information Systems, Social aspects
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-511758 (URN)10.1080/23299460.2022.2094071 (DOI)000827066000001 ()
Funder
EU, Horizon 2020, 720270EU, Horizon 2020, 785907EU, Horizon 2020, 945539
Available from: 2023-09-15 Created: 2023-09-15 Last updated: 2023-09-15Bibliographically approved
Farisco, M. & Salles, A. (2022). American and European Guidelines on Disorders of Consciousness: Ethical Challenges of Implementation. The journal of head trauma rehabilitation, 37(4), 258-262
Open this publication in new window or tab >>American and European Guidelines on Disorders of Consciousness: Ethical Challenges of Implementation
2022 (English)In: The journal of head trauma rehabilitation, ISSN 0885-9701, E-ISSN 1550-509X, Vol. 37, no 4, p. 258-262Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The recently published Guidelines on Disorders of Consciousness (DoCs) by the European Academy of Neurology (EAN) and by the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) in collaboration with the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine (ACRM) and the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research (NIDILRR) stand as the most ambitious international attempts to provide clear and standardized recommendations to clinicians working with patients with DoCs. They offer an updated, timely, and wide-ranging list of recommendations for the diagnosis, prognosis, and clinical care of affected patients. However, while commendable, the guidelines pose a number of questions including some related to the practical implementation of their recommendations. The paper introduces the Distributed Responsibility Model as a tool for maximizing the impact of recommendations in clinical practice

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Wolters Kluwer, 2022
Keywords
Consciousness, Disorders of consciousness, neuroethics
National Category
Ethics Philosophy Neurology
Research subject
Ethics; Neurology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-472763 (URN)10.1097/htr.0000000000000776 (DOI)000821484300012 ()35417436 (PubMedID)
Projects
The Human Brain Project
Funder
EU, Horizon 2020, 945539
Available from: 2022-04-14 Created: 2022-04-14 Last updated: 2022-08-04Bibliographically approved
Das, J., Forlini, C., Porcello, D. M., Rommelfanger, K. S. & Salles, A. (2022). Neuroscience is ready for neuroethics engagement. Frontiers in Communication, 7, Article ID 909964.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Neuroscience is ready for neuroethics engagement
Show others...
2022 (English)In: Frontiers in Communication, E-ISSN 2297-900X, Vol. 7, article id 909964Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Neuroscience research has been expanding, providing new insights into brain and nervous system function and potentially transformative technological applications. In recent years, there has been a flurry of prominent international scientific academies and intergovernmental organizations calling for engagement with different publics on social, ethical, and regulatory issues related to neuroscience and neurotechnology advances. Neuroscientific activities and outputs are value-laden; they reflect the cultural, ethical, and political values that are prioritized in different societies at a given time and impact a variety of publics beyond the laboratory. The focus on engagement in neuroscience recognizes the breadth and significance of current neuroscience research whilst acknowledging the need for a neuroethical approach that explores the epistemic and moral values influencing the neuroscientific agenda. The field of neuroethics is characterized by its focus on the social, legal, and philosophical implications of neuroscience including its impact on cultural assumptions about the cognitive experience, identity, consciousness, and decision-making. Here, we outline a proposal for neuroethics engagement that reflects an enhanced and evolving understanding of public engagement with neuroethical issues to create opportunities to share ideation, decision-making, and collaboration in neuroscience endeavors for the benefit of society. We demonstrate the synergies between public engagement and neuroethics scholarship and activities that can guide neuroethics engagement.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Frontiers Media S.A., 2022
Keywords
social sciences, neuroscience public engagement, science diplomacy, culture, brain initiatives, ethics, science and society
National Category
Medical Ethics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-494715 (URN)10.3389/fcomm.2022.909964 (DOI)000907256200001 ()
Funder
EU, Horizon 2020, 945539
Available from: 2023-02-23 Created: 2023-02-23 Last updated: 2023-06-27Bibliographically approved
Stahl, B. C., Akintoye, S., Bitsch, L., Bringedal, B., Eke, D., Farisco, M., . . . Ulnicane, I. (2021). From Responsible Research and Innovation to responsibility by design. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 8(2), 175-198
Open this publication in new window or tab >>From Responsible Research and Innovation to responsibility by design
Show others...
2021 (English)In: Journal of Responsible Innovation, ISSN 2329-9460, E-ISSN 2329-9037, Vol. 8, no 2, p. 175-198Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Drawing on more than eight years working to implement Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) in the Human Brain Project, a large EU-funded research project that brings together neuroscience, computing, social sciences, and the humanities, and one of the largest investments in RRI in one project, this article offers insights on RRI and explores its possible future. We focus on the question of how RRI can have long-lasting impact and persist beyond the time horizon of funded projects. For this purpose, we suggest the concept of ‘responsibility by design’ which is intended to encapsulate the idea of embedding RRI in research and innovation in a way that makes it part of the fabric of the resulting outcomes, in our case, a distributed European Research Infrastructure.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis, 2021
National Category
Communication Studies Ethics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-466988 (URN)10.1080/23299460.2021.1955613 (DOI)000688330500001 ()
Funder
EU, Horizon 2020
Available from: 2022-02-04 Created: 2022-02-04 Last updated: 2023-07-14Bibliographically approved
Salles, A. (2021). Humanness: Some neuroethical reflections. In: Martin Hevia (Ed.), Regulating Neuroscience: Transnational legal challenges: (pp. 1-179). Elsevier
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Humanness: Some neuroethical reflections
2021 (English)In: Regulating Neuroscience: Transnational legal challenges / [ed] Martin Hevia, Elsevier, 2021, p. 1-179Chapter in book (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Neuroscience research is expected to further our understanding of humans. Such knowledge might make an impact on some ingrained beliefs about what humans are and invite reconsideration of ethical and legal categories that tend to draw a sharp line between humans and living and non-living non-humans and the legal protections each deserves. Moreover, the convergence of neuroscience and technology leads to the development and applications of neurotechnology to alleviate diseases and even enhance the human brain. Some neurotechnological applications, it is often suggested, could have an impact on humanness in general and on the identity and personhood of specific individuals in particular and that this calls for legal responses. A lively debate regarding the ethical implications of neurotechnologies on personal identity and authenticity has taken a prominent place within neuroethics. Less has been written on what is the “humanness” that some people suggest might be altered by some neurotechnological applications.

In this chapter, I focus on this issue. First, I provide some conceptual distinctions and outline how “humanness” has typically been addressed. Next, I outline current neuroscientific research that gives support to the view that the constant and multifactorial human bio-cultural interplay that enables high level behavioral and cognitive features might be paramount in what humans are. Finally, I advance some implications for the ethical and legal discussion.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2021
Series
Developments in Neuroethics and Bioethics, ISSN 2589-2959 ; 4
National Category
Humanities and the Arts
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-466983 (URN)10.1016/bs.dnb.2021.03.002 (DOI)
Available from: 2022-02-04 Created: 2022-02-04 Last updated: 2022-02-17Bibliographically approved
Chandler, J. A., Cabrera, L. Y., Doshi, P., Fecteau, S., Fins, J. J., Guinjoan, S., . . . Wu, H. (2021). International Legal Approaches to Neurosurgery for Psychiatric Disorders. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 14, Article ID 588458.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>International Legal Approaches to Neurosurgery for Psychiatric Disorders
Show others...
2021 (English)In: Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, E-ISSN 1662-5161, Vol. 14, article id 588458Article, review/survey (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Neurosurgery for psychiatric disorders (NPD), also sometimes referred to as psychosurgery, is rapidly evolving, with new techniques and indications being investigated actively. Many within the field have suggested that some form of guidelines or regulations are needed to help ensure that a promising field develops safely. Multiple countries have enacted specific laws regulating NPD. This article reviews NPD-specific laws drawn from North and South America, Asia and Europe, in order to identify the typical form and contents of these laws and to set the groundwork for the design of an optimal regulation for the field. Key challenges for this design that are revealed by the review are how to define the scope of the law (what should be regulated), what types of regulations are required (eligibility criteria, approval procedures, data collection, and oversight mechanisms), and how to approach international harmonization given the potential migration of researchers and patients.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Frontiers Media S.A.FRONTIERS MEDIA SA, 2021
Keywords
neuroethics, regulation, law, deep brain stimulation, psychosurgery, neurosurgery for psychiatric disorders
National Category
Neurology Law and Society
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-435709 (URN)10.3389/fnhum.2020.588458 (DOI)000612163300001 ()33519399 (PubMedID)
Available from: 2021-02-26 Created: 2021-02-26 Last updated: 2024-01-17Bibliographically approved
Salles, A., Evers, K. & Farisco, M. (2020). Anthropomorphism in AI. AJOB Neuroscience, 11(2), 88-95
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Anthropomorphism in AI
2020 (English)In: AJOB Neuroscience, ISSN 2150-7740, E-ISSN 2150-7759, Vol. 11, no 2, p. 88-95Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

AI research is growing rapidly raising various ethical issues related to safety, risks, and other effects widely discussed in the literature. We believe that in order to adequately address those issues and engage in a productive normative discussion it is necessary to examine key concepts and categories. One such category is anthropomorphism. It is a well-known fact that AI’s functionalities and innovations are often anthropomorphized (i.e., described and conceived as characterized by human traits). The general public’s anthropomorphic attitudes and some of their ethical consequences (particularly in the context of social robots and their interaction with humans) have been widely discussed in the literature. However, how anthropomorphism permeates AI research itself (i.e., in the very language of computer scientists, designers, and programmers), and what the epistemological and ethical consequences of this might be have received less attention. In this paper we explore this issue. We first set the methodological/theoretical stage, making a distinction between a normative and a conceptual approach to the issues. Next, after a brief analysis of anthropomorphism and its manifestations in the public, we explore its presence within AI research with a particular focus on brain-inspired AI. Finally, on the basis of our analysis, we identify some potential epistemological and ethical consequences of the use of anthropomorphic language and discourse within the AI research community, thus reinforcing the need of complementing the practical with a conceptual analysis.

Keywords
Artificial Intelligence, Anthropomorphism, Ethics, Philosophy of technology
National Category
Ethics Philosophy Computer Systems Robotics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-408012 (URN)10.1080/21507740.2020.1740350 (DOI)
Projects
The Human Brain Project
Funder
EU, Horizon 2020
Available from: 2020-04-02 Created: 2020-04-02 Last updated: 2020-05-04Bibliographically approved
Salles, A. & Farisco, M. (2020). Of Ethical Frameworks and Neuroethics in Big Neuroscience Projects: A View from the HBP. AJOB Neuroscience, 11(3), 167-175
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Of Ethical Frameworks and Neuroethics in Big Neuroscience Projects: A View from the HBP
2020 (English)In: AJOB Neuroscience, ISSN 2150-7740, E-ISSN 2150-7759, Vol. 11, no 3, p. 167-175Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The recently published BRAIN 2.0 Neuroethics Report offers a very helpful overview of the possible ethical, social, philosophical, and legal issues raised by neuroscience in the context of BRAIN’s research priorities thus contributing to the attempt to develop ethically sound neuroscience. In this article, we turn to a running theme of the document: the need for an ethical framework for the BRAIN Initiative and for further integration of neuroethics and neuroscience. We assess some of the issues raised and provide an explanation of how we have addressed them in the Human Brain Project. We offer our experience in the HBP as a potential contribution to the international debate about neuroethics in the big brain initiatives. Our hope is that among other things, the type of exchange proposed by this AJOB special issue will prove productive in further identifying and discussing the issues and in inspiring appropriate solutions.

Keywords
Culture, Ethical framework, neuroethics, neuroscience, philosophy, RRI
National Category
Medical Ethics
Research subject
Philosophy; Ethics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-416691 (URN)10.1080/21507740.2020.1778116 (DOI)
Projects
Human Brain Project
Funder
EU, Horizon 2020, SGA3 945539
Available from: 2020-07-30 Created: 2020-07-30 Last updated: 2021-07-27Bibliographically approved
Farisco, M., Evers, K. & Salles, A. (2020). Towards Establishing Criteria for the Ethical Analysisof Artificial Intelligence. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(5), 2413-2425
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Towards Establishing Criteria for the Ethical Analysisof Artificial Intelligence
2020 (English)In: Science and Engineering Ethics, ISSN 1353-3452, E-ISSN 1471-5546, Vol. 26, no 5, p. 2413-2425Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Ethical reflection on Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become a priority. In this article, we propose a methodological model for a comprehensive ethical analysis ofsome uses of AI, notably as a replacement of human actors in specific activities. Weemphasize the need for conceptual clarification of relevant key terms (e.g., intelligence) in order to undertake such reflection. Against that background, we distinguish two levels of ethical analysis, one practical and one theoretical. Focusing onthe state of AI at present, we suggest that regardless of the presence of intelligence,the lack of morally relevant features calls for caution when considering the role ofAI in some specific human activities.

National Category
Robotics Computer Systems Ethics Philosophy
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-416147 (URN)10.1007/s11948-020-00238-w (DOI)000546219500001 ()32638285 (PubMedID)
Projects
Human Brain Project SGA3
Funder
EU, Horizon 2020, 945539
Available from: 2020-07-10 Created: 2020-07-10 Last updated: 2023-02-14Bibliographically approved
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0002-1397-7932

Search in DiVA

Show all publications