Public Trust of Brain-Computer Interfaces

Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) are an emerging technology that allows humans to control machines with their brain signals. When the person has a specific action-based thought, they can generate electrical activity in specific brain areas, and the nerve cells carry electrical signals. The BCI then translates this activity into commands for the computer [1], which then returns the sensory input to the brain [2]. This brain-computer communication can be achieved through a chip implanted in the brain to read electrical activity or, in other cases, through non-invasive approaches that translate brain signals from electrodes placed on the scalp (EEGs) [3]. While an argument could be made that these technologies are similar to other critical biomedical devices like pacemakers or insulin pumps, BCI technologies pose an even greater risk to the patients in terms of its potential impact on cognitive function. Understanding the factors of patient and societal trust in their safety, appropriate medical use, and protections around data privacy is a crucial step in preparing for the potential deployment of BCI technologies [4] [5]. Recent studies on public perceptions of neurotechnologies suggest that participants reported more positive feelings towards neurotechnologies when they were used to help individuals who suffered from profound motor symptom disruption in comparison to mood disorder or enhanced memory treatments. [6] [7]. The primary research question for this study is: “How do external factors (i.e., technology use purpose and invasive/non-invasive use case) impact trust in brain-computer interfaces?”. Participants were recruited (n= 122, age M = 20.36) to complete a survey where they were randomly assigned to one of six conditions based on BCI use purpose and type of BCI device. The participants were asked to read a vignette about a person who was considering using a BCI for a condition (mood, memory, or motor condition) [7]. In the second section of the vignette, the participants were presented with information about a BCI with either invasive or non-invasive implementation along with an illustrative diagram to clarify how the BCI would work in that condition [7]. Finally, participants were asked to complete a set of questions about their perceptions of trust in the BCI technology, as it was described in their vignette conditions [8]. The study did not find any significant main effects or interactions between purpose of use and invasiveness of the BCI on perceptions of trust, which was inconsistent with previous findings on general acceptance and attitudes towards BCI [6] [7]. This suggests there is a need for the development of a more accurate measure of trust specific to BCI technologies. This instrument might be used to determine what external factors influence perceptions of trust in BCIs to help guide regulation measures before this technology is permitted to be deployed for different use cases by commercial entities.