Scientific Research and the Public Trust
- 831 Downloads
This essay analyzes the concept of public trust in science and offers some guidance for ethicists, scientists, and policymakers who use this idea defend ethical rules or policies pertaining to the conduct of research. While the notion that public trusts science makes sense in the abstract, it may not be sufficiently focused to support the various rules and policies that authors have tried to derive from it, because the public is not a uniform body with a common set of interests. Well-focused arguments that use public trust to support rules or policies for the conduct of research should specify (a) which public is being referred to (e.g. the general public or a specific public, such as a particular community or group); (b) what this public expects from scientists; (c) how the rule or policy will ensure that these expectations are met; and (d) why is it important to meet these expectations.
KeywordsPublic trust Science Ethics Policy Public expectations
This research was supported by the Intramural Program of the National Institute of Environmental Health Science (NIEHS), National Institutes of Health (NIH). It does not represent the views of the NIEHS, NIH, or U.S. Government.
- American Public Health Association. (2010). Ethical guidelines. Accessed March 2, 2010, from http://www.apha.org/programs/education/progeduethicalguidelines.htm.
- American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. (2010). Code of ethics. Accessed March 2, 2010, from http://www.asbmb.org/Page.aspx?id=70&terms=ethics.
- Association of American Medical Colleges. (2001). Protecting subjects, preserving trust, promoting progress: Policy and guidelines for individual financial interests in human subjects research. Accessed March 2, 2010, from http://www.aamc.org/research/coi/firstreport.pdf.
- Bowen, A. (2002). Research involving pregnant women. In R. Amdur & E. Bankert (Eds.), Institutional review board management and function (pp. 380–382). Boston: Jones and Bartlett.Google Scholar
- Committee on Science, Engineering and Public Policy. (2009). On being a scientist (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
- Dictionary.com. (2010). Public. Dictionary.com unabridged. Random House, Inc. Accessed May 12, 2010, from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/public.
- Dresser, R. (2001). When science offers salvation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
- Gambetta, D. (Ed.). (1988). Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relationships. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Govier, T. (1997). Social trust and human communities. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
- Hardin, R. (2001). Trust. In L. Becker & C. Becker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of ethics (2nd ed., pp. 1728–1731). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Hardin, R. (2006). Trust. New York: Polity.Google Scholar
- Institute of Medicine. (2001). Preserving public trust: Accreditation and human research participant protection programs. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
- Merton, V. (1993). The exclusion of pregnant, pregnable and once-pregnable people (a.k.a. women) from biomedical research. American Journal of Law and Medicine, 19, 369–451.Google Scholar
- Moore, D. (2003). Public lukewarm on animal rights. The Gallup Organization, May 21, 2003. Accessed March 13, 2010, from http://www.gallup.com/poll/8461/public-lukewarm-animal-rights.aspx.
- National Institutes of Health. (2010). NIH public trust. Accessed May 12, 2010, from http://publictrust.nih.gov/index.cfm.
- National Science Foundation. (2010). Science and technology indicators 2010. Accessed May 12, 2010, from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind10/c/cs1.htm.
- Obama, B. (2009). Memorandum for the heads of executive departments and agencies: Scientific integrity. March 9, 2009. Accessed May 12, 2010, from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Memorandum-for-the-Heads-of-Executive-Departments-and-Agencies-3-9-09/.
- Rosenberg, J. (1995). The practice of philosophy. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
- Schüklenk, U. (2000). Access to experimental drugs in terminal illness. London: Informa Healthcare.Google Scholar
- Shrader-Frechette, K. (1994). Ethics of scientific research. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar