Cognitive Dignity by Design: Governance Architecture for Valid Neuro-Monitoring Data and Explainable Preventive Decision Support in Industry 5.0
Author(s)
Prof. Dr. Julio Cesar Ramirez Vargas , Prof. Dr. S. Sandhya , Isaidys Adriana Abanto , Col Prof Dr. J Satpathy ,
Download Full PDF Pages: 39-45 | Views: 6 | Downloads: 2 | DOI:
Abstract
cognitive readiness risk states. However, when neuro-monitoring is experienced as punitive surveillance, workers may conceal symptoms, alter behavior, or disengage; corrupting the very data the system depends on. Ethical governance is therefore a technical prerequisite for data validity. Objective of the paper is to propose 'cognitive dignity' as a practical design requirement for workplace neuro-technology and to translate it into implementable governance controls, including privacy-preserving dashboards, explainability, and non-punitive action protocols. Methodology includes integrating (i) neuro - rights and mental privacy principles, (ii) emerging international neuro-technology governance guidance, (iii) occupational psychosocial risk management standards, and (iv) operational design elements from tri-phasic readiness screening (baseline–demand–recovery) that outputs traffic-light readiness states (green/amber/red). Approach derives minimum technical and organizational controls intended to be auditable and scalable. Scope includes recognition of brain-state variability and limits, where measurement is used for protection and recovery rather than punishment. We propose a Three-view Governance model: (1) Individual view (2) Team view—aggregated/anonymous for workload balancing, and (3) Organization view—aggregated/anonymous for system redesign. We specify a minimum explainability standard (3 factors, 2 recommended actions, 1 state), a non-punitive decision loop (Protect–Recover–Reevaluate), and auditability controls (role-based access, logging, retention limits, worker participation, and redress). We further clarify alignment with the EU AI Act prohibition on workplace emotion recognition by distinguishing physiological readiness markers (e.g., load/fatigue) from emotion inference. Results indicate that cognitive dignity is not only an ethical stance; it is a technical requirement for trustworthy data, adoption, and effective prevention. Embedding dignity into governance, explainability, and action protocols can convert neuro-technology from surveillance into preventive care compatible with Industry 5.0 goals.
Keywords
Neuro-Ethics; Neuro-Rights; Psychosocial Safety; Industry 5.0 and Cognitive Readiness
References
i. European Union. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonized rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act). Official Journal of the European Union. 2024; OJ L 2024/1689 (12 July 2024).
ii. European Commission. AI Act Single Information Platform (official information portal). 2024.
iii. UNESCO. Recommendation on the Ethics of Neuro-technology. Adopted by UNESCO’s General Conference (43rd session), November 2025.
iv. ISO. ISO 45003:2021 Occupational health and safety management ; Psychological health and safety at work ; Guidelines for managing psychosocial risks. International Organization for Standardization; 2021.
v. Ienca M, Andorno R. Towards new human rights in the age of neuroscience and neuro-technology. Life Sciences, Society and Policy. 2017;13:5.
vi. European Commission. AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) ; Regulatory framework on AI. Shaping Europe’s digital future. 2024. (Accessed 2026-01-09).
vii. European Union. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonized rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act). Official Journal of the European Union. Published 12 July 2024.
viii.Yuste R, Goering S, et al. Four ethical priorities for neuro-technologies and AI. Nature. 2017; 551:159–163.
ix. Ienca M. On Neuro-rights. Front Hum Neurosci. 2021; 15:701258.
x. OECD. Recommendation on Responsible Innovation in Neuro-technology. OECD Legal Instruments. Adopted 11 December 2019.
xi. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Novel neuro-technologies: intervening in the brain. 2013.
Cite this Article: