The Ethical Challenges of Socially Responsible Science

References

• American Anthropological Association. (2012). Principles of Professional Responsibility. Available at http://ethics.aaanet.org/category/statement/. Last accessed July 14, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• American Chemical Society. (2012). The Chemical Professional’s Code of Conduct. Available at http://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/careers/profdev/ethics/the-chemical-professionals-code-of-conduct.html. Last accessed July 14, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• American Society for Microbiology. (2005). Code of Ethics. Available at http://www.asm.org/index.php/governance/code-of-ethics. Last accessed July 14, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Ayer, A. J. (1952). Language, Truth, and Logic. 2nd ed. New York: Dover.
   Google Scholar
• Barnes, B. (1977). Interests and the Growth of Knowledge. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Beckwith, J. and Huang, F. (2005). Should we make a fuss? A case for social responsibility in science. Nature Biotechnology, 23(12): 1479–1480.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Børsen, T., Antia, A. N., and Glessmer, M. S. (2013). A case study of teaching social responsibility to doctoral students in the climate sciences. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19(4): 1491–1504.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carson, R. (1962). Silent Spring. New York: Houghton-Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Chakravartty, A. (2010). A Metaphysics for Scientific Realism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cialdini, R. B. (1993). Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion. New York: Quill William Morrow.
   Google Scholar
• Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. (2009). On Being a Scientist: A Guide to Responsible Conduct in Research. 3rd ed. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• de Melo-Martín, I., Palmer, L. I., and Fins, J. J. (2007). Viewpoint: Developing a research ethics consultation service to foster responsive and responsible clinical research. Academic Medicine, 82(9): 900–904.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Douglas, H. (2004). The irreducible complexity of objectivity. Synthese, 138(3): 453–473.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Douglas, H. (2009). Science, Policy, and the Value-Neutral Ideal. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
   Google Scholar
• Edsall, J. T. (1975). Scientific freedom and responsibility. Science, 188(4189): 687–693.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Einstein, A. (1939). Letter to Franklin D. Roosevelt. August 2, 1939.
   Google Scholar
• Elliott, K. C. (2010). Hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles, energy policy, and the ethics of expertise. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 27(4): 376–393.
   Google Scholar
• Elliott, K. C. (2011). Is a Little Pollution Good for You? Incorporating Societal Values in Environmental Research. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Elliott, K. C. and Resnik, D. B. (2014). Science, policy, and the transparency of values. Environmental Health Perspectives, 122(7): 647–650.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forge, J. (2008). The Responsible Scientist: A Philosophical Inquiry. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
   Google Scholar
• Frankel, M. S. (2012). Regulating the boundaries of dual-use research. Science, 336(6088): 1523–1525.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haack, S. (2003). Defending Science within Reason. New York: Prometheus.
   Google Scholar
• Harding, S. (1986). The Science Question in Feminism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kitcher, P. (2001). Science, Truth, and Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kleinman, D. (2000). Science, Technology, and Democracy. Albany: State University of New York Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kourany, J. (2010). Philosophy of Science after Feminism. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T. S. (1970) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T. S. (1977). The Essential Tension. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. and Woolgar, S. (1986). The Social Construction of Facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Laudan, L. (1977). Progress and Its Problems. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Longino, H. (1990). Science as Social Knowledge. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nagel, E. (1961). The Structure of Science. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and World.
   Google Scholar
• National Institutes of Health. (2009). Update on the Requirement for Instruction in the Responsible Conduct of Research. Available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-10-019.html. Last accessed July 14, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Pielke, R. (2007). The Honest Broker: Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Popper, K. (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson.
   Google Scholar
• Reiser, J. M. and Bulger, R. E. (1997). The social responsibilities of biological scientists. Science and Engineering Ethics, 3(2): 137–143.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Resnik, D. B. (1998). The Ethics of Science. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Resnik, D. B. (2001). Setting biomedical research priorities: Justice, science, and public participation. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 11(2): 181–204.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Resnik, D. B. (2007). The Price of Truth: How Money Affects the Norms of Science. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Resnik, D. B. (2009). Playing Politics with Science: Balancing Scientific Independence and Government Oversight. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Resnik, D. B. (2010). Genomic research data: Open vs. restricted access. IRB, 32(1)) 1–6.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Resnik, D. B. (2012). Environmental Health Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Resnik, D. B. (2013). H5N1 avian flu research and the ethics of knowledge. Hastings Center Report, 43(2): 22–33.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Resnik, D. B. and Elliott, K. C. (2013). Taking financial relationships into account when assessing research. Accountability in Research, 20(3): 184–205.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Resnik, D. B. and Elliott, K. C. (2015). Bisphenol A and risk management ethics. Bioethics, 29: 182–189.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Resnik, D. B. and Kennedy, C. E. (2010). Balancing scientific and community interests in community-based participatory research. Accountability in Research, 17(4): 198–210.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudner, R. (1953). The scientist qua scientist makes value judgments. Philosophy of Science, 20(1): 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Shamoo, A. E. and Resnik, D. B. (2014). Responsible Conduct of Research. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shrader-Frechette, K. S. (1994). Ethics of Scientific Research. Boston: Rowman and Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Shrader-Frechette, K. S. (2012). Research integrity and conflicts of interest: The case of unethical research-misconduct charges filed by Edward Calabrese. Accountability in Research, 9(4): 220–242.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singer, M. (2001). What did the Asilomar exercise accomplish, what did it leave undone? Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 44(2): 186–191.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snow, C. P. (1959). The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Solomon, S., Qin, D., Manning, M., Marquis, M., Averyt, K., Tignor, M., Miller Jr, H. L., and Chen, Z. (2007). Climate Change 2007: The Physical Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Soranno, P., Cheruvelil, K., Elliott, K., and Montgomery, G. (2014). It’s good to share: Why environmental scientists’ ethics are out of date. BioScience. doi:10.1093/biosci/biu169. Published online 22 October 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Watts, S. (2014). Society needs more than wonder to respect science. Nature, 508(7495): 151.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wing, S. (2002). Social responsibility and research ethics in community-driven studies of industrialized hog production. Environmental Health Perspectives, 110(5): 437–444.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar