Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 770 |
| Number of pages | 6 |
| Journal | Humanities and Social Sciences Communications |
| Volume | 11 |
| Publication status | Published - 17 Jun 2024 |
Abstract
Scientists are increasingly expected to incorporate socio-political considerations in their work, for instance by anticipating potential socio-political ramifications. While this is aimed at promoting pro-social values, critics argue that the desire to serve society has led to self-censorship and even to the politicization of science. Philosophers of science have developed various strategies to distinguish between influences of values that safeguard the integrity and freedom of research from those impinging on them. While there is no consensus on which strategy is the best, they all imply some trade-offs between social desirability and the aims of science. If scientists are to incorporate socio-political considerations, they should receive relevant guidance and training on how to make these trade-offs. Codes of conduct for research integrity as professional codes of ethics can help scientists navigate evolving professional expectations. Unfortunately, in their current status, these codes fail to offer guidance on how to weigh possibly conflicting values against the aims of science. The new version of the European Code of Conduct (2023) is a missed opportunity in this regard. Future codes should include guidance on the trade-offs that professional scientists face when incorporating socio-political considerations. To increase effectiveness, codes should increase the attention that scientists have for such trade-offs, make sure scientists construe them in appropriate ways, and help scientists understand the motivations behind pro-social policies. Considering the authority of these documents—especially the European one—amending codes of conduct can be a promising starting point for broader changes in education, journal publishing, and science funding.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Business, Management and Accounting(all)
- General Business,Management and Accounting
- Arts and Humanities(all)
- General Arts and Humanities
- Social Sciences(all)
- General Social Sciences
- Psychology(all)
- General Psychology
- Economics, Econometrics and Finance(all)
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
In: Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Vol. 11, 770, 17.06.2024.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/debate › Research › peer review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Codes of conduct should help scientists navigate societal expectations
AU - Ambrosj, Jacopo
AU - Dierickx, Kris
AU - Desmond, Hugh
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © The Author(s) 2024.
PY - 2024/6/17
Y1 - 2024/6/17
N2 - Scientists are increasingly expected to incorporate socio-political considerations in their work, for instance by anticipating potential socio-political ramifications. While this is aimed at promoting pro-social values, critics argue that the desire to serve society has led to self-censorship and even to the politicization of science. Philosophers of science have developed various strategies to distinguish between influences of values that safeguard the integrity and freedom of research from those impinging on them. While there is no consensus on which strategy is the best, they all imply some trade-offs between social desirability and the aims of science. If scientists are to incorporate socio-political considerations, they should receive relevant guidance and training on how to make these trade-offs. Codes of conduct for research integrity as professional codes of ethics can help scientists navigate evolving professional expectations. Unfortunately, in their current status, these codes fail to offer guidance on how to weigh possibly conflicting values against the aims of science. The new version of the European Code of Conduct (2023) is a missed opportunity in this regard. Future codes should include guidance on the trade-offs that professional scientists face when incorporating socio-political considerations. To increase effectiveness, codes should increase the attention that scientists have for such trade-offs, make sure scientists construe them in appropriate ways, and help scientists understand the motivations behind pro-social policies. Considering the authority of these documents—especially the European one—amending codes of conduct can be a promising starting point for broader changes in education, journal publishing, and science funding.
AB - Scientists are increasingly expected to incorporate socio-political considerations in their work, for instance by anticipating potential socio-political ramifications. While this is aimed at promoting pro-social values, critics argue that the desire to serve society has led to self-censorship and even to the politicization of science. Philosophers of science have developed various strategies to distinguish between influences of values that safeguard the integrity and freedom of research from those impinging on them. While there is no consensus on which strategy is the best, they all imply some trade-offs between social desirability and the aims of science. If scientists are to incorporate socio-political considerations, they should receive relevant guidance and training on how to make these trade-offs. Codes of conduct for research integrity as professional codes of ethics can help scientists navigate evolving professional expectations. Unfortunately, in their current status, these codes fail to offer guidance on how to weigh possibly conflicting values against the aims of science. The new version of the European Code of Conduct (2023) is a missed opportunity in this regard. Future codes should include guidance on the trade-offs that professional scientists face when incorporating socio-political considerations. To increase effectiveness, codes should increase the attention that scientists have for such trade-offs, make sure scientists construe them in appropriate ways, and help scientists understand the motivations behind pro-social policies. Considering the authority of these documents—especially the European one—amending codes of conduct can be a promising starting point for broader changes in education, journal publishing, and science funding.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85196198922&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1057/s41599-024-03261-5
DO - 10.1057/s41599-024-03261-5
M3 - Comment/debate
AN - SCOPUS:85196198922
VL - 11
JO - Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
JF - Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
M1 - 770
ER -