The Ethical Challenges of Socially Responsible Science

Social responsibility is an essential part of the responsible conduct of research that presents difficult ethical questions for scientists. Recognizing one’s social responsibilities as a scientist is an important first step toward exercising social responsibility, but it is only the beginning, since scientists may confront difficult value questions when deciding how to act responsibly. Ethical dilemmas related to socially responsible science fall into at least three basic categories: 1) dilemmas related to problem selection, 2) dilemmas related to publication and data sharing, and 3) dilemmas related to engaging society. In responding to these dilemmas, scientists must decide how to balance their social responsibilities against other professional commitments and how to avoid compromising their objectivity. In this article, we will examine the philosophical and ethical basis of social responsibility in science, discuss some of the ethical dilemmas related to exercising social responsibility, and make five recommendations to help scientists deal with these issues.     

Research on environmental health interventions: ethical problems and solutions

This article reviews a variety of ethical issues one must consider when conducting research on environmental health interventions on human subjects. The paper uses the Kennedy Krieger Institute lead abatement study as well as a hypothetical asthma study to discuss questions concerning benefits and risks, risk minimization, safety monitoring, the duty to warn, the duty to report, the use of control groups, informed consent, equitable subject selection, privacy, conflicts of interest, and community consultation. Research on environmental health interventions can make an important contribution to our understanding of human health and disease prevention, provided it is conducted in a manner that meets prevailing scientific, ethical, and legal standards for research on human subjects.     

Promoting children's ethical development through social and emotional learning

In today's climate of increased emphasis on measuring achievement through high-stakes testing, academic subjects are too often divorced from the social context in which they are taught. We know that learning is a social process. In fact, many educators and other youth development practitioners recognize that social, emotional, and ethical development cannot be ignored in the name of better academic preparation, especially in the face of data showing that students are more disengaged than ever before. Social and emotional learning (SEL) offers educators and other youth development personnel a framework for addressing students' social and emotional needs in systematic way. SEL is the process of acquiring the skills to recognize and manage emotions, develop caring and concern for others, establish positive relationships, make responsible decisions, and handle challenging situations effectively. Research has shown that SEL has an impact on every aspect of children's development: their health, ethical development, citizenship, academic learning, and motivation to achieve. This chapter profiles one school in Illinois that has been implementing SEL programming for a number of years. The authors provide evidence of the impact of SEL on school climate, student behavior, and attitudes. Ultimately the authors see this as fostering the kind of understanding of the larger world that leads young people to make ethical choices. They propose that the lessons learned are applicable to a wide variety of settings, including other schools, after-school programs, and summer camps.     

Expanding the Scope of Responsible Conduct of Research Instruction

We argue that responsible conduct research (RCR) instruction should be extended beyond students and trainees funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) or National Science Foundation (NSF) to include all students, trainees, faculty, and research staff involved in research. Extending the scope of RCR instruction can help institutions develop and maintain an environment that promotes ethical research conduct. Universities and scientific organizations have objected to expanding the scope of RCR instruction on the grounds that it would be a major undertaking that would require the expenditure of additional institutional resources. We argue, however, that expanding the scope of RCR instruction can be done efficiently without placing undue burdens on institutions.     

Ethical Virtues in Scientific Research

Most approaches to promoting integrity in research are principle-based in that they portray ethical conduct as consisting of adherence to ethical rules, duties, or responsibilities. Bruce MacFarlane has recently criticized the principle-based approach to promoting integrity in research and offered a virtue-based alternative. MacFarlane argues that principle-based approaches do not provide adequate guidance for ethical decision-making and are not very useful in moral education. In this article, I examine and critique MacFarlane's defense of the virtue-based approach. I argue that virtue-based and principle-based approaches to ethics are complementary and that they both can help promote research integrity.     

Which countries protect intellectual property? The case of software piracy

Using data on software piracy, we examine how protection of intellectual property varies across countries. Consistent with other studies, we find that intellectual property receives greater protection in developed economies; high-income countries have lower piracy rates. We also find that protection depends on cultural factors. Countries with an individualist culture have lower piracy rates than do countries with a collectivist culture. Piracy rates are also lower in countries that have strong institutions that enforce contracts and protect property from expropriation. These results suggest that national policies toward intellectual property reflect not only economic concerns but also national culture and institutions.     

The Role of Intuition in Risk/Benefit Decision-Making in Human Subjects Research

One of the key principles of ethical research involving human subjects is that the risks of research to should be acceptable in relation to expected benefits. Institutional review board (IRB) members often rely on intuition to make risk/benefit decisions concerning proposed human studies. Some have objected to using intuition to make these decisions because intuition is unreliable and biased and lacks transparency. In this article, I examine the role of intuition in IRB risk/benefit decision-making and argue that there are practical and philosophical limits to our ability to reduce our reliance on intuition in this process. The fact that IRB risk/benefit decision-making involves intuition need not imply that it is hopelessly subjective or biased, however, since there are strategies that IRBs can employ to improve their decisions, such as using empirical data to estimate the probability of potential harms and benefits, developing classification systems to guide the evaluation of harms and benefits, and engaging in moral reasoning concerning the acceptability of risks.