...
首页> 外文期刊>Frontiers in Psychology >Pills or Push-Ups? Effectiveness and Public Perception of Pharmacological and Non-Pharmacological Cognitive Enhancement
【24h】

Pills or Push-Ups? Effectiveness and Public Perception of Pharmacological and Non-Pharmacological Cognitive Enhancement

机译:药还是俯卧撑?药理学和非药理学认知增强的有效性和公众认知

获取原文

摘要

We review work on the effectiveness of different forms of cognitive enhancement, both pharmacological and non-pharmacological. We consider caffeine, methylphenidate, and modafinil for pharmacological cognitive enhancement (PCE) and computer training, physical exercise, and sleep for non-pharmacological cognitive enhancement (NPCE). We find that all of the techniques described can produce significant beneficial effects on cognitive performance. However, effect sizes are moderate, and consistently dependent on individual and situational factors as well as the cognitive domain in question. Although meta-analyses allowing a quantitative comparison of effectiveness across techniques are lacking to date, we can conclude that PCE is not more effective than NPCE. We discuss the physiological reasons for this limited effectiveness. We then propose that even though their actual effectiveness seems similar, in the general public PCE is perceived as fundamentally different from NPCE, in terms of effectiveness, but also in terms of acceptability. We illustrate the potential consequences such a misperception of PCE can have.
机译:我们回顾了有关药理学和非药理学不同形式的认知增强的有效性的研究。我们考虑将咖啡因,​​哌醋甲酯和莫达非尼用于药理学认知增强(PCE)和计算机培训,体育锻炼和睡眠,以用于非药理学认知增强(NPCE)。我们发现,所描述的所有技术都可以对认知表现产生明显的有益影响。但是,效果的大小适中,并且始终取决于个人和情况因素以及相关的认知领域。尽管迄今为止尚缺乏允许定量比较各种技术有效性的荟萃分析,但我们可以得出结论,PCE的效果并不比NPCE更有效。我们讨论了这种有限效力的生理原因。然后,我们提出,尽管它们的实际有效性看起来相似,但在公众方面,PCE在有效性和可接受性方面都与NPCE根本不同。我们说明了对PCE的这种误解可能带来的潜在后果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号