Implantes para aumentar las capacidades innatas: Integrados vs apocalípticos ¿existe un nuevo mercado?

  1. Cristina Olarte Pascual 1
  2. Jorge Pelegrín Borondo 1
  3. Eva Marina Reinares Lara 2
  1. 1 Universidad de La Rioja

    Universidad de La Rioja

    Logroño, España


  2. 2 Universidad Rey Juan Carlos

    Universidad Rey Juan Carlos

    Madrid, España


Universia Business Review

ISSN: 1698-5117

Year of publication: 2015

Issue: 48

Pages: 86-117

Type: Article

More publications in: Universia Business Review


Cited by

  • Scopus Cited by: 11 (07-05-2023)
  • Dialnet Metrics Cited by: 2 (24-05-2023)
  • Web of Science Cited by: 8 (13-05-2023)

SCImago Journal Rank

  • Year 2015
  • SJR Journal Impact: 0.238
  • Best Quartile: Q3
  • Area: Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous) Quartile: Q3 Rank in area: 162/353
  • Area: Finance Quartile: Q3 Rank in area: 159/274
  • Area: Economics and Econometrics Quartile: Q3 Rank in area: 417/658


  • Social Sciences: B

Scopus CiteScore

  • Year 2015
  • CiteScore of the Journal : 0.8
  • Area: Business, Management and Accounting (all) Percentile: 54
  • Area: Finance Percentile: 35
  • Area: Economics and Econometrics Percentile: 32


Today, technological implants to increase innate human capacities (T3IC) are being developed in areas such as memory or computational speed. A hierarchical cluster analysis was used to test T3IC acceptance in a sample of 600 individuals. Four groups were identified: integrated, semi-integrated, non-integrated and apocalyptic. T3ICs were considered interesting, especially those able to delay ageing and increase the speed of thought; however, the intention to use them varied considerably. These results open up a new scenario for insideable technology

Bibliographic References

  • Adams, J. (2010). “Motivational narratives and assessments of the body after cosmetic surgery”. Qualitative Health Research, 20(6), 755-767. (DOI:
  • Ajzen, I. (1991). “The theory of planned behavior”. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. (DOI:
  • Belan, K. (2014). “Six life-changing science-based inventions of the year 2014 by big brands and challengers alike”. Popsop, ( (17-3-2015).
  • Bhattacharyya, A. & Kedzior, R. (2012). “Consuming the cyborg”. Advances in Consumer Research, 31, 400-403. (
  • Bhattacherjee, A. & Premkumar, G. (2004). “Understanding changes in belief and attitude toward information technology usage: A theoretical model and longitudinal test”. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 28(2), 229-254. (
  • Buchanan-Oliver, M., & Cruz, A. (2009). “The body and technology: Discourses shaping consumer experience and marketing communications of technological products and services”. Advances in Consumer Research, 36, 367-371. (
  • Buchanan-Oliver, M., & Cruz, A. (2011). “Discourses of technology consumption: Ambivalence, fear, and liminality”. Advances in Consumer Research, 39, 287-291. (
  • Cabero-Almenara, J. (1994). “Nuevas tecnologías, comunicación y educación”. Comunicar: Revista Científica Iberoamericana de Comunicación y Educación, (3), 14-25.
  • Chauhan, N., Warner, J., & Adamson, P.A. (2010). “Adolescent rhinoplasty: Challenges and psychosocial and clinical outcomes”. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, 34(4), 510-516. (DOI:
  • Christie, E., & Bloustien, G. (2010). “I-cyborg: Disability, affect and public pedagogy”. Discourse, 31(4), 483-498. (DOI:
  • Cohen, J. (2013). Memory implants. 10 Breakthrough technolgies 2013. MIT Technology Review. (
  • Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., & Warshaw, P.R. (1989). “User acceptance of computer-technology - a comparison of 2 theoretical-models”. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003. (DOI:
  • Dorneles de Andrade, D. (2010). “On norms and bodies: Findings from field research on cosmetic surgery in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil”. Reproductive Health Matters, 18(35), 74-83. (DOI:
  • Eco, U. (1968). “Apocalípticos e integrados frente a la cultura de masas”. Barcelona: Lumen.
  • Ferrer, S. (2015). Apuesta por 'startups' genéticas: así es como Google conseguirá que vivas 500 años. El Confidencial. ( (10/3/2015).
  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). “Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research”. Addison-Wesley, MA.
  • Hernández-Ortega, B & Serrano-Cinca, C. (2009). “¿Qué induce a las empresas a adoptar facturación electrónica? Efecto de las percepciones y del entorno competitivo”. Universia Business Review, 24, 96-121.
  • Giudici, M.C., Carlson, J.I., Krupa, R.K., Meierbachtol, C.J., & Vanwhy, K.J. (2010). “Submammary pacemakers and ICDs in women: Long-term follow-up and patient satisfaction”. PACE - Pacing and Clinical
  • Electrophysiology, 33(11), 1373-1375. (DOI:
  • Javo, I.M., & Sørlie, T. (2010). “Psychosocial predictors of an interest in cosmetic surgery among young norwegian women: A population-based study”. Plastic Surgical Nursing, 30(3), 180-186.
  • Kahle, R.L., & Goff Timmer, S. (1983). “A theory and method for studying values”. In R. L. Kahle (Ed.), Social values and social change. adaptation to life in America (pp. 43-71). New York: Praeger.
  • Lai, A. (2012). “Cyborg as commodity: Exploring conception of self-identity, body and citizenship within the context of emerging transplant technologies”. Advances in Consumer Research, 40, 386-394.
  • Lawton, G. (2004). “Extreme surgery”. New Scientist, 184(2471), 54-56.
  • Most, T., Wiesel, A., & Blitzer, T. (2007). “Identity and attitudes towards cochlear implant among deaf and hard of hearing adolescents”. Deafness and Education International, 9(2), 68-82. (DOI:
  • Parkhurst, A. (2012). “Becoming cyborgian: Procrastinating the singularity”. New Bioethics, 18(1), 68-80. (DOI:
  • Rokeach, M. (1973). “The nature of human values”. New York: Free Press.
  • Rosahl, S.K. (2004). “Vanishing senses—restoration of sensory functions by electronic implants”. Poiesis & Praxis, 2(4), 285-295. (DOI:
  • Schermer, M. (2009). “The mind and the machine. On the conceptual and moral implications of brain-machine interaction”. Nanoethics, 3(3), 217-230. (DOI:
  • Selinger, E., & Engström, T. (2008). “A moratorium on cyborgs: Computation, cognition, and commerce”. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 7(3), 327-341. (DOI:
  • Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F.D. (2000). “A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies”. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. (DOI:
  • Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., & Davis, F.D. (2003). “User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view”. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 27(3), 425-478. (
  • Watson, D., Clark, L.A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). “Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063-1070.
  • White, C., & Yu, Y. (2005). “Satisfaction emotions and consumer behavioral intentions”. Journal of Services Marketing, 19(6), 411-420. (DOI: