Abstract
Recent developments in the domain of bi-directional Brain–Computer Interface (BCI) technology are directed at generating naturalistic sensory perceptual experiences for disabled people. I argue that conceptualizing and operationalizing “naturalness” in this context has profound impact on disabled people and their experiences. I ask (1) what does it mean to have a “natural” perceptual experience and (2) should the bi-directional BCI-community strive for naturalness in this context? Inspired by phenomenological and 4E-cognition approaches to perception, I argue that the terms “natural” and “naturalness” should not be used in this context because of (1) polysemicity and (2) an implicit bias favoring able-bodied perception over disabled perception. I offer the phenomenological concept of transparency as a positive alternative to denote the underlying goal of embodiment and effortless use. I cash out methodological ramifications of my argument for research in bi-directional BCIs and plea for a transdisciplinary dialogue between end-users, phenomenologists and neuroscientists.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 5-19 |
| Number of pages | 15 |
| Journal | AJOB Neuroscience |
| Volume | 17 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Early online date | 31 Mar 2025 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Jan 2026 |
Keywords
- Biomimetic stimulation
- brain–computer interface
- disability
- naturalness
- perception
- phenomenology
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Somatosensory Feedback in BCIs: Why Aiming for Naturalness Raises Ethical Concerns'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver