The DOI matches its Crossref record; 68 of the 70 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Ethical Challenges of Socially Responsible Science
Open accessAbstract
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.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“It is widely accepted that scientists have a moral duty to avoid causing harms to society and prevent wrongful outcomes and omissions that they are in a position to foresee”
From Science Communication and the Problematic Impact of Descriptive Norms (2023) · cites this paper as Resnik and Elliott [2016]
In the citing paper
“Even if AI-generated questions do not lead to dangerous research, they might lead us to (immorally) waste valuable financial, computational and material resources on projects with little social or economic benefits [109].”
From Autonomous artificial intelligence, scientific research, and human values (2026) · cites this paper as [109]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Kuhn, T. S., & Schlegel, R. (1963) · Physics Today · doi:10.1063/1.3050879 · Cited by 35,538
The Logic of Scientific Discovery.
Hutchison, T. W., & Popper, K. R. (1959) · Economica · doi:10.2307/2550489 · Cited by 7,629
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Kuhn, T. S. (1996) · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226458106.001.0001 · Cited by 7,281
The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change
Kuhn, T. S. (1977) · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226217239.001.0001 · Cited by 3,861
The science question in feminism
Waters, K. (1987) · Women s Studies International Forum · doi:10.1016/0277-5395(87)90077-x · Cited by 3,811
Nagel, E., & Hawkins, D. (1961) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/1.1937571 · Cited by 3,804
Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry
Longino, H. E. (1990) · doi:10.1515/9780691209753 · Cited by 3,092
The Science Question in Feminism
Harding, S. (1986) · Cornell University Press eBooks · Cited by 2,790
The Logic of Scientific Discovery
Popper, K. R., & Weiss, G. (1959) · Physics Today · doi:10.1063/1.3060577 · Cited by 2,717
Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion
Cialdini, R. B. (1993) · Cited by 2,563
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- Carson R., 1962, Silent Spring
- Chakravartty A., 2010, A Metaphysics for Scientific Realism
- Einstein A., 1939, Roosevelt. August, 2, 1939
- Haack S., 2003, Defending Science within Reason
- Latour B., 1986, The Social Construction of Facts
- Resnik D. B., 2010, IRB, 32, 1
- Solomon S., 2007, Climate Change 2007: The Physical Basis
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Responsible Conduct of Research
Shamoo, A. E., & Resnik, D. B. (2022) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197547090.001.0001 · Cited by 224
Self-citationDrolet, M.-J., Rose-Derouin, E., Leblanc, J.-C., Ruest, M., & Williams–Jones, B. (2022) · Journal of Academic Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10805-022-09455-3 · Cited by 199
Disclosing and managing non-financial conflicts of interest in scientific publications
Resnik, D. B. (2023) · Research Ethics · doi:10.1177/17470161221148387 · Cited by 113
“who exercise this right may face ethical issues related to managing the risk of bias or the perception of bias among their colleagues or the public (Pielke, 2007; Resnik and Elliott, 2016).”
BackgroundSelf-citationGooding, P., & Kariotis, T. (2021) · JMIR Mental Health · doi:10.2196/24668 · Cited by 100
“Our findings suggest that the disciplines undertaking applied research in this field do not generally prioritize explicit consideration of ethical and legal issues in their studies—and, perhaps more broadly, “the moral, political, social and policy issues at stake” [203].”
BackgroundGeneralization Bias in Science
Peters, U., Krauss, A., & Braganza, O. (2022) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/cogs.13188 · Cited by 63
Metadata
- Authors
- Resnik, D. B., & Elliott, K. C.
- Affiliations
- National Institutes of Health (US)
- Michigan State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Resnik, David B.
- Venue
- Accountability in Research
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2015-07-20
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 31-46
- ISSN
- 0898-9621 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-5815
- PMC
- PMC4631672
- OpenAlex
- W2124882912
- Cited by
- 131
- References
- 70
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6
- FWCI
- 10.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Accountability in Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Wisconsin-Madison
- National Institutes of Health (Z99-ES999999)
- National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (ZIAES102646)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Education, Technology, and Ethics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Research, Science, and Academia
- Social Sciences › Education › Academic integrity and plagiarism
- Keywords
- social responsibility of scientists, responsible conduct of research, research ethics, ethical dilemmas, problem selection, publication ethics, data sharing, citizen participation, objectivity, professional commitment
- MeSH terms
- Ethics, Professional, Humans, Morals, Politics, Science, Social Responsibility, Ethics, Research
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
