Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Aware, Yet Ignorant: Exploring the Views of Early Career Researchers About Funding and Conflicts of Interests in Science

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Science and Engineering Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigates the level of awareness about funding influences and potential conflicts of interests (COI) among early career researchers. The sample for this study included users of one or more of the 14 U.S. laboratories associated with the National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network. To be eligible, respondents must have been either still completing graduate work or <5 years since graduation. In total, 713 early career researchers completed the web survey, with about half still in graduate school. Results indicate that although respondents were aware of potential funding and COI influences on their work, they remained largely ignorant of their role in addressing or managing these issues. Respondents often attributed the responsibility of addressing these issues to their supervisors. Respondents who had received some training around these issues, however, were more likely to assume more personal responsibility. Overall, this study points out that ignorance among early career researchers is less about awareness of funding and COI issues and more about taking personal responsibility for addressing these issues.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality, and behavior. Milton-Keynes, England: Open University Press & Chicago, IL: Dorsey Press.

  • American Chemical Society. Author Guidelines. Retrieved from http://pubs.acs.org/paragonplus/submission/langd5/langd5_authguide.pdf.

  • American Institute of Physics. AIP Publishing LLC conflict of interest ethical guidelines for journals. Retrieved from http://publishing.aip.org/authors/conflict-of-interest.

  • American Physical Society. APS guidelines for professional conduct. Retrieved from https://www.aps.org/policy/statements/02_2.cfm.

  • American Physical Society. Conflict of interest. Education: Ethics case studies. Retrieved from http://www.aps.org/programs/education/ethics/interest/.

  • Ancker, J. S., & Flanagin, A. (2007). A comparison of conflict of interest policies at peer-reviewed journals in different scientific disciplines. Science and Engineering Ethics, 13, 147–157. doi:10.1007/s11948-007-9011-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Social cognitive determinants of blood donation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 1431–1457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC). (2001). Protecting subjects, preserving trust, promoting progress: Policy and guidelines for the oversight of individual financial interests in human subjects research. Washington, DC. https://www.aamc.org/download/75302/data/firstreport.pdf

  • Beaudry, C., & Kanaian, R. (2013). Follow the (industry) money—The impact of science networks and industry-to-university contracts on academic patenting in nanotechnology and biotechnology. Industry and Innovation, 20(3), 241–260. doi:10.1080/13662716.2013.791125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, V. W. (2014). Conflicts of interest, selective inertia, and research malpractice in randomized clinical trials: An unholy trinity. Science and Engineering Ethics, 21(4), 857–874.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Besley, J. C. (2015). What do scientists think about the public and does it matter to their online engagement? Science and Public Policy, 42, 201–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bird, S. J., & Spier, R. E. (2005). The complexity of competing and conflicting interests. Science and Engineering Ethics, 11, 515–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. J. (2001). Trust us to make a difference: Ensuring public confidence in the integrity of clinical research. Academic Medicine, 76, 209–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dana, J., & Loewenstein, G. (2003). A social science perspective on gifts to physicians from industry. The Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA), 290(2), 252–255. doi:10.1001/jama.290.2.252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, M. (2001). Introduction. In M. Davis & A. Stark (Eds.), Conflict of interest in the professions (pp. 3–19). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeAngelis, C. D. (2000). Conflict of interest and the public trust. Journal of the American Medical Association, 284, 2237–2238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downs, A. (1966). Inside bureaucracy. Boston: Little, Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunbar, W. S. (2005). Emotional Engagement in professional ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 11(4), 535–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eosco, E., Tallapragada, M., McComas, K. A., & Brady, M. (2014). Exploring societal and ethical views of nanotechnology REUs. Nanoethics, 8(1), 91–99. doi:10.1007/s11569-014-0192-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). They dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29, 109–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fan, W., & Yan, Z. (2010). Factors affecting response rates in web surveys: A systematic review. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 132–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fanelli, D. (2009). How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS One, 4(5), e5738. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005738.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Firestein, S. (2012). Ignorance: How it drives science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, M., & Yzer, M. C. (2003). Using theory to design effective health behavior interventions. Communication Theory, 13, 164–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1990). Uncertainty and Quality in Science for Policy. the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gaudet, J. (2013). It takes two to tango: Knowledge mobilization and ignorance mobilization in science research and innovation. Prometheus: Critical Studies in Innovation, 31(3), 169–187. doi:10.1080/08109028.2013.847604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gross, M. (2012). Old science fiction, new inspiration: Communicating unknowns in the utilization of geothermal energy. Science Communication, 35(6), 810–818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IC Insights. (2014). Top 10 semiconductor R&D leaders ranked for 2013. Retrieved from http://www.icinsights.com/news/bulletins/Top-10-Semiconductor-RD-Leaders-Ranked-For-2013-/.

  • Iyengar, S. (1996). Framing responsibility for political issues. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 546(1), 59–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, K. K., Forsberg, E.-M., Gamborg, C., Millar, K., & Sandøe, P. (2011). Facilitating ethical reflection among scientists using the ethical matrix. Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(3), 425–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lesser, L. I., Ebbeling, C. B., Goozner, M., Wypij, D., & Ludwig, D. S. (2007). Relationship between funding source and conclusion among nutrition-related scientific articles. Plos Medicine, 4(1), 41–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levine, J., Gussow, J. D., Hastings, D., & Eccher, A. (2003). Authors’ financial relationships with the food and beverage industry and their published positions on the fat substitute olestra. American Journal of Public Health, 93(4), 664–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linnerooth, J. (1984). The political processing of uncertainty. Acta Psychologica, 56, 219–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipton, S., Boyd, E. A., & Bero, L. A. (2004). Conflicts of interest in academic research: Policies, processes, and attitudes. Accountability in Research, 11, 83–102. doi:10.1080/08989620490512214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longino, H. (1990). Science as social knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McComas, K. A. (2008). Nutrition communication. The role of trust in health communication and the effect of conflicts of interest among scientists. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 67, 428–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McComas, K. A. (2012). Researcher views about funding sources and conflicts of interest in nanotechnology. Science and Engineering Ethics, 18(4), 699–717. doi:10.1007/s11948-011-9264-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McComas, K. A., & Simone, L. M. (2003). Media coverage of conflicts of interest in science. Science Communication, 24, 395–419. doi:10.1177/1075547003024004001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mecca, J. T., Gibson, C., Giorgini, V., Medeiros, K. E., Mumford, M. D., & Connelly, S. (2015). Researcher perspectives on conflicts of interest: A qualitative analysis of views from academia. Science and Engineering Ethics, 21, 843–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michaels, D., & Monforton, C. (2005). Manufacturing uncertainty: Contested science and the protection of the public’s health and environment. American Journal of Public Health, 95(S1), S39–S48. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2004.043059.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, F. (2004). The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: Sharing the laboratory life. Research Policy, 33(4), 643–659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nanowerk. (2014). An overview of journals publishing nanotechnology articles. News. Retrieved from http://www.nanowerk.com/nanotechnology-news/newsid=35778.php.

  • NNIN (2014). National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network. http://www.nnin.org/about-us.

  • NNI Budget. (2012). National Nanotechnology Initiative. Retrieved from http://www.nano.gov/node/748.

  • Nulty, D. D. (2008). The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: What can be done? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(3), 301–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Gorman, H. (1975). Pluralistic ignorance and white estimates of white support for racial segregation. Public Opinion Quarterly, 39(3), 313–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, S. (1989). On being a scientist. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Proctor, R. N. (1995). Cancer wars: How Politics shapes what we know and don’t know about cancer. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ravetz, J. R. (1993). The Sin of science: Ignorance of ignorance. Science Communication, 15(2), 157–165. doi:10.1177/107554709301500203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J. (2013). Organizational ignorance: Towards a managerial perspective on the unknown. Management Learning, 44(3), 215–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothman, K. J. (1993). Conflict of interest: The new McCarthyism in science. Journal of the American Medical Association, 269, 2782–2784.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schrag, B., Ferrell, G., Weil, V., & Fiedler, T. J. (2003). Barking up the wrong tree? Industry funding of academic research: A case study with commentaries. Science and Engineering Ethics, 9, 569–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Semiconductor Industry Association and Semiconductor Research Corporation. (2015). Nanotechnology-inspired grand challenges for the next decade. Retrieved from http://www.semiconductors.org/clientuploads/directory/DocumentSIA/Research%20and%20Technology/SIA%20and%20SRC%20Response%20to%20Grand%20Challenges%20RFI.pdf.

  • Smithson, M. (1993). Ignorance and science: Dilemmas, perspectives, and prospects. Science Communication, 15(2), 133–156. doi:10.1177/107554709301500202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spier, R. E. (2002). On dealing with bias. Science and Engineering Ethics, 8(4), 483–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stocking, S. H. (1998). On drawing attention to ignorance. Science Communication, 20(1), 165–178. doi:10.1177/1075547098020001019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, D. G. (1982). Pluralistic ignorance and spiral of silence: A formal analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 46, 311–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press (2009). Public praises science; scientists fault public, media: Scientific Achievements Less Prominent Than a Decade Ago. Report retrieved 14 January 2016 from http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-pdf/528.pdf.

  • Weiner, B. (2006). Social motivation, justice, and the moral emotions: an attributional approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, H. C. (2013). Epidemiology of human atopic dermatitis—seven areas of notable progress and seven areas of notable ignorance. Veterinary Dermatology, 24(1), 3-e2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under Grant No. ECS-0335765. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. The authors would also like to thank Rachel Brockhage and Dr. Christopher Clarke, who assisted with the research, and the reviewers for their insightful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA

    Meghnaa Tallapragada & Katherine A. McComas

  2. Eastern Research Group, Arlington, VA, 22201, USA

    Gina M. Eosco

Authors
  1. Meghnaa Tallapragada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gina M. Eosco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Katherine A. McComas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Meghnaa Tallapragada.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tallapragada, M., Eosco, G.M. & McComas, K.A. Aware, Yet Ignorant: Exploring the Views of Early Career Researchers About Funding and Conflicts of Interests in Science. Sci Eng Ethics 23, 147–164 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9764-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9764-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation