Towards a Moral Ecology of Pharmacological Cognitive Enhancement in British Universities

The Use and Impact of Cognitive Enhancers among University Students: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Cognitive enhancers (CEs), also known as "smart drugs", "study aids" or "nootropics" are a cause of concern. Recent research studies investigated the use of CEs being taken as study aids by university students. This manuscript provides an overview of popular CEs, focusing on a range of drugs/substances (e.g., prescription CEs including amphetamine salt mixtures, methylphenidate, modafinil and piracetam; and non-prescription CEs including caffeine, cobalamin (vitamin B12), guarana, pyridoxine (vitamin B6) and vinpocetine) that have emerged as being misused. The diverted non-prescription use of these molecules and the related potential for dependence and/or addiction is being reported. It has been demonstrated that healthy students (i.e., those without any diagnosed mental disorders) are increasingly using drugs such as methylphenidate, a mixture of dextroamphetamine/amphetamine, and modafinil, for the purpose of increasing their alertness, concentration or memory.

AIM

To investigate the level of knowledge, perception and impact of the use of a range of CEs within Higher Education Institutions.

METHODOLOGY

A systematic review was conducted in adherence with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Whilst 1400 studies were identified within this study through a variety of electronic databases (e.g., 520 through PubMed, 490 through Science Direct and 390 through Scopus), 48 papers were deemed relevant and were included in this review.

RESULTS

The most popular molecules identified here included the stimulant CEs, e.g., methylphenidate, modafinil, amphetamine salt mixtures and caffeine-related compounds; stimulant CEs' intake was more prevalent among males than females; drugs were largely obtained from friends and family, as well as via the Internet. It is therefore suggested that CEs are increasingly being used among healthy individuals, mainly students without any diagnosed cognitive disorders, to increase their alertness, concentration, or memory, in the belief that these CEs will improve their performance during examinations or when studying. The impact of stimulant CEs may include tolerance, dependence and/or somatic (e.g., cardiovascular; neurological) complications.

DISCUSSION

The availability of CEs for non-medical indications in different countries is influenced by a range of factors including legal, social and ethical factors. Considering the risk factors and motivations that encourage university students to use CE drugs, it is essential to raise awareness about CE-related harms, counteract myths regarding "safe" CE use and address cognitive enhancement in an early stage during education as a preventative public health measure.

Medical Students' Attitudes Towards Pharmacological Cognitive Enhancement With Methylphenidate

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess medical students' perception of pharmacological cognitive enhancement (PCE) with methylphenidate and to determine whether this perception differs between junior and senior medical students.

METHODS

The second and fifth year medical student groups of 2017 at a specific university completed self-administered questionnaires in order to investigate if there were a difference in their attitudes towards methylphenidate use for PCE.

RESULTS

A total of 353 students were included as follows: 135 second year and 218 fifth year students. Fifth year students were more aware of PCE with methylphenidate than second year students (94% versus 87%; p value = 0.02). Many students (second year = 86%; fifth year = 71%; p value = 0.2469) were of the opinion that methylphenidate could enhance academic performance. Sixty-six percent of all the students were concerned about the fairness of PCE; 93% were concerned about the harmfulness of methylphenidate. There were no statistical significant differences in the attitudes towards methylphenidate use for PCE between the two groups of junior and senior students.

CONCLUSION

In both groups, the majority of students were against the use of methylphenidate for PCE in students without attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder. Their attitudes regarding the use of methylphenidate for non-medical purposes did not differ significantly. Addressing the topic of PCE with medical students is essential, and the impact on their practice can be an important direction for future research.

Cognitive enhancing drug use by students in the context of neoliberalism: cheating? Or, a legitimate expression of competitive entrepreneurialism?

A recurrent theme regarding drug policy and the use of cognitive enhancing drugs (CEDs) by students in higher education (HE), concerns the potential introduction of policy to prohibit the use of CEDs. One of the arguments put forward to support a prohibitive policy framework, is that the use of CEDs by students in HE is a form of academic misconduct; that the use of CEDs constitutes cheating. Now, given that it is widely documented that the use of CEDs by students in HE has been growing steadily over the past decade or more, there is surprisingly, a dearth of in-depth discussion on the topic of whether their use represents academic misconduct and is a form of cheating. Therefore, this commentary will summarise some examples of literature dedicated to the topic, before discussing whether the use of CEDs by students in HE constitutes cheating, when framed contextually, around neoliberalism and the key characteristics of competition and entrepreneurialism. The commentary will propose a potentially useful argument that, given the neoliberal context and those key characteristics, (HE) students could in theory, legitimise their use of CEDs. Consequently, students using CEDs for the purpose of hypothetically increasing academic excellence, would not consider their use of CEDs as a form of academic misconduct, of cheating. Thus, this paper, would in principle, support and endorse a legal, regulatory approach to CED policy and in addition, recommends that individual HE institutions do not prohibit the use of CEDs by students on the grounds of academic misconduct, but instead, advance harm reduction initiatives around their use.

Pharmacological cognitive enhancement: Examining the ethical principles guiding college students' abstention

Objectives

To understand the ethical principles guiding college students' abstention from pharmacological cognitive enhancement (PCE), and to determine the correlates associated with endorsing different principles.

Design

One-stage cluster sampling was used to implement a paper-based survey among undergraduate students attending one university in the U.S. Thematic analysis was used to explore the ethical principles guiding PCE abstention. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to examine sociodemographic correlates associated with endorsed ethical principles.

Participants

Of the 499 eligible students who completed the survey (student response proportion: 94.7%), 259 students had a negative attitude towards PCE, did not engage in PCE, and provided reasons for abstention.

Results

The thematic analysis resulted in the identification of eight themes, with respondents often endorsing more than one theme per response. The three themes most endorsed were non-malfeasance (i.e., avoiding PCE to prevent harm), disapproval of drugs (i.e., a moral opposition to substance use) and dosage beneficence (i.e., adhering to dosage guidance to promote health). The sociodemographic correlates associated with endorsing each theme varied across themes.

Conclusions

Students abstain from PCE for a multitude of reasons, many of which are guided by ethical principles. These findings may be incorporated into future prevention programming messages.

Moral Attitudes Toward Pharmacological Cognitive Enhancement (PCE): Differences and Similarities Among Germans With and Without PCE Experience

Pharmacological cognitive enhancement (PCE), the use of illicit and/or prescription drugs to increase cognitive performance, has spurred controversial discussion in bioethics. In a semi-structured interview study with 60 German university students and employees, differences and similarities in moral attitudes toward PCE among 30 experienced participants (EPs) vs. 30 inexperienced participants (IPs) were investigated. Substances EPs used most often are methylphenidate, amphetamines, tetrahydrocannabinol and modafinil. Both EPs and IPs addressed topics such as autonomous decision making or issues related to fairness such as equality in test evaluation and distortion of competition. While most EPs and IPs were convinced that the decision of whether or not to use PCE is part of their individual freedom, their views varied considerably with regard to fairness. IPs considered issues related to fairness as much more critical than EPs. Thus, a person’s moral attitudes toward PCE may not only depend on moral common sense, but also on whether they have used illegal and/or prescription drugs for PCE before. This points to the importance of including the various relevant stakeholder perspectives in debates on the ethical and social implications of PCE.