To enlarge the discussion of scientific responsibility for research integrity, this paper offers two historico-philosophical observations. First, in the broad history of ideas, modern ethics replaces social role responsibility with appeals to abstract principles; by contrast, discussions within the scientific community of responsibility for research integrity constitute a rediscovery of the continuing vitality of role responsibility. This is a rediscovery from which philosophy itself may benefit. Second, within the context of scientists’ concerns, the idea of role responsibility has undergone significant evolution from “collective responsibility” to the notion of responsibility resting with a “trans-scientific community.” Further challenges nevertheless remain in order to relate scientific role responsibility for scientific integrity to the relationship between science and society. To promote a notion of integrity not just in science but in the science-society relationship, it may be useful to think in terms of a “co-responsibility” for scientific integrity.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Mitcham, Carl, and Von Schomberg, René. (2000) “The Ethics of Engineers: From Occupational Role Responsibility to Public Co-responsibility.” In The Empirical Turn in the Philosophy of Technology, Kroes, Peter, and Meijers, Anthonie (Eds.), Research in Philosophy and Technology 20: 167–189.
Sarbin, Theodore R. (1968) “Role: Psychological Aspects,” in: International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, Free Press, New York, vol. 13, p. 546.
Galatians 3:28. New Testament of the Bible.
1 Peter 3:13. New Testament of the Bible.
Schneewind, J.B. (1984) “The Divine Corporation and the History of Ethics,” in: Rorty, Richard, Schneewind, J.B., and Skinner, Quentin (Eds.), Philosophy in History: Essays on the Historiography of Philosophy, Cambridge University, New York, pp. 173–191.
Bradley, F.H. (1911) Ethical Studies, Stechert, New York.
Merton, Robert K. (1942) “Science and Technology in a Democratic Order,” Journal of Legal and Political Sociology 1: 115–126.
Merton, Robert K. (1968) “The Matthew Effect in Science,” Science 159: 56–63.
Zuckerman, Harriet. (1988) “The Sociology of Science,” in: Smelser, N.J. (Ed.), Handbook of Sociology, Sage, Newbury Park, CA, pp. 511–574.
Edge, David. (1995) “Reinventing the Wheel,” in: Jasanoff, Sheila, Markle, Gerald E., Petersen, James C., and Pinch, Trevor (Eds.), Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 3–23.
Knorr Cetina, Karin. (1995) “Laboratory Studies: The Cultural Approach to the Study of Science,” in: Sheila Jasanoff, Gerald E. Markle, James C. Petersen, and Trevor Pinch (Eds.), Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 140–166.
Edwards, Paul (Ed.) (1967) The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Macmillan, New York.
Becker, Lawrence C., and Becker, Charlotte B. (Eds.) (1991) Encyclopedia of Ethics, Garland, New York.
Borchert, Donald M. (Ed.) (1996) The Encyclopedia of Philosophy Supplement, Macmillan, New York.
Craig, Edward (Ed.). (1998) Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Routledge, New York.
Chadwick, Ruth. (Ed.) (1998) Encyclopedia of Applied Ethics, Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
Teich, Albert H., and Frankel, Mark S. (1992) Good Science and Responsible Scientists: Meeting the Challenge of Fraud and Misconduct in Science. Directorate for Science and Policy Programs, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, DC.
Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society. (1984) Honor in Science, Sigma Xi, Research Triangle Park, NC. (Second edition, revised and enlarged, 1986.)
Chubin, Daryl E. (1985) “Misconduct in Research: An Issue of Science Policy and Practice,” Minerva 23 2 (Summer): 175–202.
Braxton, John M. (Ed.). (1994). “Perspectives on Research Misconduct,” theme issue, Journal of Higher Education 65, 3 (May/June): 239–400.
Braxton, John M. (Ed.) (1999) Perspectives on Scholarly Misconduct in the Sciences, Ohio State University Press, Columbus, OH.
Weil, Vivian. (1997) “Science, Research Ethics of” in: The Encyclopedia of Philosophy Supplement, Macmillan, New York, pp. 519–521.
Davis, Michael. (1999) Ethics and the University, Routledge, New York.
Committee on the Conduct of Science, National Academy of Sciences. (1989) On Being a Scientist, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Panel on Scientific Responsibility and the Conduct of Research. (1992) Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process, vol. 1, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Frankel, Mark S. (1993) “Professional Societies and Responsible Research Conduct,” Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process, vol. 2, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
National Institutes of Health. (1986) NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, 15 (July 18): 2.
45 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations 689 (July 1, 1987).
Buzzelli, Donald E. (1994) “NSF’s Definition of Misconduct in Science,” Centennial Review, 38, 2 (Spring): 273–296.
Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy; National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. (1995) On Being a Scientist: Responsible Conduct in Research, 2nd edition, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Chalk, Rosemary; Frankel, Mark S.; and Chafer, Sallie B. (1980) AAAS Professional Ethics Project: Professional Ethics Activities in the Scientific and Engineering Societies. American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, DC.
Monastersky, Richard. (2002) “Publish and Perish?” Chronicle of Higher Education (October 11), pp. A16–A19.
Davis, Michael. (1998) “Conflict of Interest,” in: Encyclopedia of Applied Ethics, Academic Press, San Diego, CA, vol. 1, pp. 589–595.
Jonas, Hans. (1984) The Imperative of Responsibility: In Search of an Ethics for the Technological Age, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Harremoës, Paul; Gee, David; MacGarvin, Malcolm; Stirling, Andy; Keys, Jane; Wynne, Brian; and Vaz, Sofia Guedes, eds. (2001) Late Lessons from Early Warnings: The Precautionary Principle 1896–2000, European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark. Available online at http://reports.eea.eu.int/environmental_issue_report_2001_22/en.)
“AAAS Science and Human Rights Program.” shr.aaas.org
Richardson, Henry S. (1999) “Institutionally Divided Moral Responsibility” in: Paul, Ellen Frankel, Miller, Fred D. Jr., and Paul, Jeffrey (Eds.), Responsibility, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 218–249.
Gutmann, Amy, and Thompson, Dennis F. (1996) Democracy and Disagreement: Why Moral Conflict Cannot Be Avoided in Politics, and What Should Be Done About It, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Bradbury, Judith A., and Branch, Kristi M. (1999) An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Local Site-Specific Advisory Boards for U.S. Department of Energy Environmental Restoration Programs, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA.
Greenberg, Daniel S. (2002) “Self-Restraint by Scientists Can Avert Federal Intrusion,” Chronicle of Higher Education (October 11), p. B20.
Atlas, Ronald M. (2002) “National Security and the Biological Research Community,” Science 298: 753–754.
Mitcham, Carl. (2001) “Los científicos e ingenieros como críticos morales en el mundo tecnocientífico,” in: Ibarra, Andoni and López Cerezo, José Antonio (Eds.), Desafios y tensiones actuales en ciencia, tecnología y sociedad, Biblioteca Nueva and the Organización de Estados Iberoamericanos, Madrid, pp. 199–216.
Mitcham, Carl. (2003) “Professional Idealism among Scientists and Engineers: A Neglected Tradition in STS Studies,” Technology in Society, in press.
Sonnert, Gerhard, and Holton, Gerald. (2002) Ivory Bridges: Connecting Science and Society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
This paper revisits ideas initially developed in collaboration with René von Schomberg.1
About this article
Cite this article
Mitcham, C. Co-responsibility for research integrity. SCI ENG ETHICS 9, 273–290 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-003-0014-0
- role responsibility
- role morality
- research integrity
- scientific responsibility