The "how" and "whys" of research: Life scientists' views of accountability

Journal of Medical Ethics

Volumn 35, Issue 12, 2009, Pages 762-767

  Ladd, J M ^a   Lappe M D ^a,b   McCormick, J B ^c   Boyce, A M ^d   Cho, M K ^a  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^d Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ETHICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MALE; MEDICAL ETHICS; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PEER REVIEW; PERSONNEL; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PUBLIC RELATIONS; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; UNIVERSITY;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; ETHICS, PROFESSIONAL; FEMALE; FOCUS GROUPS; HUMANS; INTERPROFESSIONAL RELATIONS; MALE; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; RESEARCH PERSONNEL; SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY; UNIVERSITIES;

EID: 72449140999     PISSN: 03066800     EISSN: 14734257     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jme.2009.031781     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Bush V. Science the endless frontier. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1945.
2. Sarewitz DR. Frontiers of illusion: science, technology and the politics of progress. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1996.
3. Kitcher P. Responsible biology. Bioscience 2004;54:331-6.
4. Chadwick R. Professional ethics and the 'good' of science. Interdiscip Sci Rev 2005;30:247-56.
5. Gibbons M. Science's new social contract with society. Nature 1999;402(6761 Suppl):C81-4.
6. Lane N. Double helixes and double-edged swords. In: 9th International Conference on Genes, Gene Families and Isozymes; 14-19 April 1997, San Antonio, Texas. http://www.nsf.gov/news/speeches/lane/nl97helx.htm (accessed 26 Sep 2009)
7. Lane N. The civic scientist and science policy. In: Teich AH, Nelson SD, McEnaney C et al, eds. AAAS science and technology policy yearbook. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1999:chapter 22. http://www.aaas.org/ spp/yearbook/chap22.htm (accessed 26 Sep 2009).
8. Alberts B. Science and human needs. National Academy of Sciences 137th annual meeting; 1 May 2000, Washington, DC. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences. http://www.nasonline.org/site/DocServer/2000address.pdf?docID=982 (accessed 26 Sep 2009).
9. Beckwith J, Huang F. Should we make a fuss? A case for social responsibility in science. Nat Biotechnol 2005;23:1479-80.
10. Wilsdon J, Wynne B, Stilgoe J. The public value of science: or how to ensure that science really matters. London: Demos, 2005.
11. Davies KG, Wolf-Phillips J. Scientific citizenship and good governance: implications for biotechnology. Trends Biotechnol 2006;24:57-61.
12. Pittenger DJ. Intellectual freedom and editorial responsibilities within the context of controversial research. Ethics Behav 2003;13:105-25. 13.
13. Reddy C. Scientist citizens. Science 2009;323:1405.
14. Pielke RA. The honest broker: making sense of science in policy and politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
15. Longino HE. Science as social knowledge: values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990.
16. Ziman J. Getting scientists to think about what they are doing. Sci Eng Ethics 2001;7:165-76.
17. Buchanan A. Institutions, beliefs and ethics: eugenics as a case study. J Polit Philos 2007;15:22-45.
18. De Vries R, Anderson MS, Martinson BC. Normal misbehavior: scientists talk about the ethics of research. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2006;1:43-50.
19. Berk RA, Korenman SG, Wenger NS. Measuring consensus about scientific research norms. Sci Eng Ethics 2000;6:315-40.
20. Korenman SG, Berk R, Wenger NS, et al. Evaluation of the research norms of scientists and administrators responsible for academic research integrity. JAMA 1998;279:41-7.
21. Kohler RE. Moral economy, material culture and community in Drosophila genetics. In: Biagioli M, ed. The science studies reader. New York: Routledge, 1999.
22. Rabino I. Genetic testing and its implications: human genetics researchers grapple with ethical issues. Sci Technol Human Values 2003;28:365-402.
23. Mathews DJ, Kalfoglou A, Hudson K. Geneticists' views on science policy formation and public outreach. Am J Med Genet A 2005;137:161-9.
24. Hjorleifsson S, Schei E. Scientific rationality, uncertainty and the governance of human genetics: an interview study with researchers at deCODE genetics. Eur J Hum Genet 2006;14:802-8.
25. Nicholas B. Molecular geneticists and moral responsibility: "maybe if we were working on the atom bomb I would have a different argument". Sci Eng Ethics 1999;5:515-30.
26. Rabino I. How European and U.S. genetic engineering scientists view the impact of public attention on their field: a comparison. Sci Technol Human Values 1994;19:23-46.
27. Rabino I. Societal and commercial issues affecting the future of biotechnology in the United States: a survey of researchers' perceptions. Naturwissenschaften 1998;85:109-16.
28. McCormick JB, Boyce AM, Cho MK. Biomedical scientists' perceptions of ethical and social implications: is there a role for research ethics consultation? PLoS ONE 2009;4:e4659. http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone. 0004659 (accessed 26 Sep 2009).
29. Wainwright SP, Williams C, Michael M, et al. Ethical boundary-work in the embryonic stem cell laboratory. Sociol Health Illn 2006;28:732-48.
30. Wainwright SP, Williams C, Michael M, et al. From bench to bedside? Biomedical scientists' expectations of stem cell science as a future therapy for diabetes. Soc Sci Med 2006;63:2052-64.
31. Wainwright S, Williams C, Michael M, et al. Remaking the body? Scientists' genetic discourses and practices as examples of changing expectations on embryonic stem cell therapy for diabetes. New Genet Soc 2007;26:251-68.
32. National Science Foundation. Grant proposal guide. Chapter II: proposal preparation instructions. Arlington, VA: NSF, 2009. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/ policydocs/pappguide/nsf09_1/gpg_2.jsp (accessed 15 Jun 2009).
33. Rest JR. A psychologist looks at the teaching of ethics. Hastings Cent Rep 1982;12:29-36.
34. Office of Extramural Research, National Institutes of Health. Multiple principal investigators. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services 2007. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/multi_pi/index.htm (accessed 15 Jun 2009).