| Abstrakt: |
Conventional electroencephalography (EEG) rarely appears in neuroethical discussions, despite its widespread use in scientific research. This oversight is largely due to its (perceived) harmlessness. There is limited empirical data regarding harm caused by EEG, with concerns mostly confined to its therapeutic applications. The conditions of EEG experiments, however, may require participants to remain still in an enclosed space for extended periods and maintain prolonged attention on monotonous tasks, sometimes while avoiding blinking. To date, there is no evidence of the impact of human electrophysiological research on psychological well-being. Could these demanding conditions impact participants’ well-being beyond the risk of physical harm? Our study represents the first dedicated investigation into this aspect. To assess changes in psychological well-being and contributing factors, we administered the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) to participants in three distinct electrophysiological experiments before the start of the preparation phase (pre-test) and again after the experiment concluded (post-test). Our findings indicate that participants experience significant changes in their affect from pre- to post-experiment, as measured by the PANAS. Specifically, there was a significant reduction in positive affect across the group, while changes in negative affect were not observed. Furthermore, our analysis revealed that the reduction in positive affect was significantly predicted by the duration of the experiment, identifying time as a crucial factor in the negative impact on participants' psychological well-being. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
Full text from SpringerLink