Frank Kupper

The value lab: Exploring moral frameworks in the deliberation of values in the animal biotechnology debate

The development of animal biotechnology is accompanied by factual uncertainty and value pluralism. The arising policy controversy demands a frame-reflective approach to policy-making. A first step in such an approach is the articulation of existing value frames to provide constructive options for moral deliberation. The value lab method interactively makes an in-depth reconstruction of the qualitative diversity of moral value frameworks. This article describes the methodological steps taken to engage participants in the exploration and co-construction of their ideas, using their own concepts and language. Eventually, we discuss how this contributes to the development of new methodologies to handle value conflicts in complex public policy issues. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Inclusive deliberation and action in emerging RRI practices: the case of neuroimaging in security management

ABSTRACTWhat does it mean to facilitate inclusive deliberation, a core aspect of Responsible Research and Innovation, at a very early stage in a controversial field such as security? We brought neuroscientists and security professionals together in a step-by-step fashion – interviews, focus groups and dialogue – to construct imaginaries of neuroimaging applications. Neuroscientists and security professionals related differently to neuroimaging investigation. Some of what the security professionals seek in neuroscience might better be provided by social psychology. However, neuroimaging can be imagined to aid professionalization through a theory-informed security management practice. Post-hoc reflection interviews were performed to identify impacts, such as reflexivity of the stakeholders, the formation of new relationships and actions. Our use of social psychology as a low-technology alternative brought into sharper focus where potential responsible security sector uses of neuroimaging lie. However, witho...

Responsible Reporting: Neuroimaging News in the Age of Responsible Research and Innovation

Besides offering opportunities in both clinical and non-clinical domains, the application of novel neuroimaging technologies raises pressing dilemmas. ‘Responsible Research and Innovation’ (RRI) aims to stimulate research and innovation activities that take ethical and social considerations into account from the outset. We previously identified that Dutch neuroscientists interpret “responsible innovation” as educating the public on neuroimaging technologies via the popular press. Their aim is to mitigate (neuro)hype, an aim shared with the wider emerging RRI community. Here, we present results of a media-analysis undertaken to establish whether the body of articles in the Dutch popular press presents balanced conversations on neuroimaging research to the public. We found that reporting was mostly positive and framed in terms of (healthcare) progress. There was rarely a balance between technology opportunities and limitations, and even fewer articles addressed societal or ethical aspects of neuroimaging research. Furthermore, neuroimaging metaphors seem to favour oversimplification. Current reporting is therefore more likely to enable hype than to mitigate it. How can neuroscientists, given their self-ascribed social responsibility, address this conundrum? We make a case for a collective and shared responsibility among neuroscientists, journalists and other stakeholders, including funders, committed to responsible reporting on neuroimaging research.

Conceptualizing playfulness for reflection processes in responsible research and innovation contexts: a narrative literature review

Playfulness supports people in learning. This study synthesizes a framework for playfulness for one particular type of learning: responsible research and innovation (RRI) reflection processes. Play...

Dynamics of problem setting and framing in citizen discussions on synthetic biology

Synthetic biology is an emerging scientific field where engineers and biologists design and build biological systems for various applications. Developing synthetic biology responsibly in the public interest necessitates a meaningful societal dialogue. In this article, we argue that facilitating such a dialogue requires an understanding of how people make sense of synthetic biology. We performed qualitative research to unravel the underlying dynamics of problem setting and framing in citizen discussions on synthetic biology. We found that most people are not inherently for or against synthetic biology as a technology or development in itself, but that their perspectives are framed by core values about our relationships with science and technology and that sensemaking is much dependent on the context and general feelings of (dis)content. Given that there are many assumptions focused on a more binary idea of the public’s view, we emphasize the need for frame awareness and understanding in a meaningful dialogue.

Supporting Citizens in Reflection on Synthetic Biology by Means of Video-Narratives:

To unravel how video-narratives can support reflection in Responsible Research and Innovation contexts, this study evaluates four video-narratives designed for citizen-reflection on synthetic biology. Each video narrative comprised separate clips about three subtopics in which actors represented different views of synthetic biology. The video-clips were presented to Dutch citizens in two different setups: per narrator and per subtopic. Both setups appeared to trigger three reflection processes and three reflection outcomes. Our findings suggest that video-narratives shown per subtopic support reflection more extensively, provided that workshop setups pay considerable attention to reflection on values and assumptions.

Transcranial Electrical Stimulation to Enhance Cognitive Performance of Healthy Minors: A Complex Governance Challenge

An increasing number of healthy adolescents are consuming products that can enhance their cognitive performance in educational settings. Currently, the use of pharmaceuticals is the most widely discussed enhancement method in the literature, but new evidence suggests that other methods based on Transcranial Electrical Stimulation (tES) also have potential as cognitive enhancer. Just like pharmaceutical enhancers, the availability and education-related use of tES-devices raise a broad range of ethical, legal, and societal issues that need to be addressed by policy-makers. Few studies, however, have specifically explored these issues in relation to child wellbeing. In this narrative review with systematic search, we describe the issues for child wellbeing that could arise from the availability and education-related use of tES-based enhancers by healthy minors. We demonstrate that the issues form a complex web of uncertainties and concerns, which are mainly incited by two factors. First is the high level of factual uncertainty due to gaps in empirical evidence about the exact working mechanisms and efficacy of tES. Moreover, a lack of insight into the technique’s (long-term) effects on healthy developing brains, and uncertainties about potential cognitive trade-offs have fueled concerns about the technique’s safety and impact. The second factor that contributes to the complexity of issues is the presence of moral diversity in our society. Different opinions exist on whether a certain enhancement effect would be desirable and whether potential risks would be acceptable. These opinions depend on one’s moral perspective, and the way one interprets and weights values such as the child’s autonomy and authenticity. The challenge for proper governance resides in the design of an appropriate framework that is capable of balancing the different moral perspectives in society, while recognizing the uncertainties that still exist. We therefore argue for a responsible innovation approach, which encourages an adaptive attitude toward emerging knowledge and dynamic societal values, to deal with the identified issues regarding tES-based enhancement appropriately.

Hybrid E-Learning Tool TransLearning: Video Storytelling to Foster Vicarious Learning within Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration Networks.

Abstract E-learning and storytelling approaches can support informal vicarious learning within geographically widely distributed multi-stakeholder collaboration networks. This case study evaluates hybrid e-learning and video-storytelling approach ‘TransLearning’ by investigation into how its storytelling e-tool supported informal vicarious learning, while it was applied in multi-stakeholder collaborations called ‘Regional Ateliers’. TransLearning was meant to supplement learning within RAs about running rural sustainable innovation projects. The e-tools’ video-stories were thematically coded for content analysis. Stakeholder workshops in which the e-tool was used, as well as gathered user experiences, were transcribed, analysed inductively and juxtaposed. Findings indicate that stakeholders vicariously learned by (1) creative association and (2) collaborative creation of new stories, based on watching individual or multiple videos, respectively. However, the e-tool’s learning content seemed rife with conceptual knowledge, indicating an absence of concrete experiences that are essential for rich(er) vicarious learning. Storytelling e-tools developed for vicarious learning in novice collaborations may inherently encounter this. To conclude, hybrid storytelling approaches like TransLearning seem to support informal vicarious learning best if they employ (1) processes in which learners actively co-create content (selection of topics and storytellers), (2) extensive storyboarding (3) and learning facilitators that encourage learners to collaboratively compare videos and think associatively.

Exploring Responsible Innovation as a Guiding Concept: The Case of Neuroimaging in Justice and Security.

Although responsible innovation (RI) is to change the scientific system to meet the grand challenges of our time, its criteria are still unclear. This study explores meaning negotiation on RI by academic actors in both formal and informal discourse. In the formal discourse on RI, we identified characteristic shifts, including engagement of societal stakeholders, anticipation and adaptability, broadening, and new insights on impacts and regulation. However, the intended group of scientists themselves were not visibly involved in the formal discussion. Therefore, as a case study, we studied the informal discourse of Dutch scientists in the field of functional neuroimaging relevant to the domain of justice and security. Our findings show that RI is unfamiliar to scientists. We suggest that RI as a guiding concept is in need of operationalization within the specific context in which it is used. A point of entry for such a process is the role responsibility taken on by scientists. Resistance can be expected as RI can be equivocated with a limitation on the autonomy of science. To avoid evasive practices, extra efforts are needed to involve the scientists in a co-constructive process to operationalize RI.

Exploring embodied speculation in participatory design and innovation

In this one-day learning workshop, we explore how embodied speculation in participatory design and innovation can help stakeholders imagine, critically reflect and engage in dialogue about the social opportunities and ethical implications of emerging technologies. The workshop starts with a round table discussion about relevant criteria when conducting embodied speculations. We then engage in embodied speculation ourselves, focusing on identifying the social opportunities and ethical implications of Quantified Self technologies for the year 2026. We end the workshop by reflecting on our experiences with these embodied speculations to foster knowledge exchange and learning. We reach out to participants with different professional backgrounds in the fields of design and innovation that would like to learn about embodied speculative techniques and who would like to explore the research opportunities this opens up.