Journals should enforce non-clickbait titles. "Mind control" and "cyborgs" are not scientific terms. Just as how "sentience when embodied" is new age mumbo jumbo. I am certain that the reviewers asked for a title change, but some authors love the clickbait. Maybe it gets them more refs?
I don't see the problem with the language here, the rats are indeed cyborgs (just like humans with pacemakers) and humans are actually engaging in mind control here.
I think cyborg is a perfectly fine scientific term used in multiple papers, why makes you not like it?
i dont think it's scientific at all, does my dental filling make me a cyborg and where is that line crossed. And then u have what is 'mind control', what is 'mind'
That many paper titles use it does not mean it's a common scientific term. This is context-dependent, could be ok in an opinion or philosophy paper, but in an experimenal paper about locomotion control via brain-machine interfaces it s just unacceptable imo
I always assumed a cyborg is a mechanically assisted biological being, while a machine controlled biological body is the opposite of a cyborg, a psychotron.
