The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A Tapestry of Values: An Introduction to Values in Science
Abstract
Abstract This book makes the contemporary philosophical literature on science and values accessible to a wide readership. It focuses on two questions: What are the major ways in which scientific reasoning can be influenced by values? and How can we tell whether those influences are appropriate or not? To address these questions, it examines case studies from a variety of research areas, including climate science, anthropology, chemical risk assessment, ecology, neurobiology, biomedical research, and agriculture. These cases show that the value-free ideal for science is problematic; values have important roles to play in identifying research topics, choosing research questions, determining the aims of inquiry, responding to uncertainty, and deciding how to communicate information. The book argues that values can influence science in these ways without harming scientific objectivity—in fact, making value judgments more explicit actually promotes objectivity. In place of the value-free ideal, the scientific community should strive to meet three conditions for addressing values appropriately: (1) the influences of values should be made transparent; (2) values should reflect ethical and social priorities; and (3) values should be scrutinized via processes of engagement that incorporate multiple stakeholders. The book explores multiple engagement strategies that can help bring values to light and subject them to critical scrutiny.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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
“Bias mostly occurs unintentionally (i.e., subconsciously); for example, when a scientist underpowers a study or is not aware of sexist assumptions that underpin their interpretive framework [48–52].”
From Autonomous artificial intelligence, scientific research, and human values (2026) · cites this paper as [50]
In the citing paper
“Most scientific research done by humans stems from personal, social, political, or economic values that drive inquiry [33, 50, 105].”
From Autonomous artificial intelligence, scientific research, and human values (2026) · cites this paper as [50]
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–200 of 342
Teaching Science as a Process, Not a Set of Facts
Öberg, G., Campbell, A., Fox, J. A., Graves, M. L., Ivanochko, T., Matsuchi, L., Mouat, I. C., & Welsh, A. (2021) · Science & Education · doi:10.1007/s11191-021-00253-8 · Cited by 14
How do value-judgements enter model-based assessments of climate sensitivity?
Undorf, S., Pulkkinen, K., Wikman–Svahn, P., & Bender, F. A. ‐. (2022) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-022-03435-7 · Cited by 16
Khosrowi, D. (2023) · Philosophy of the Social Sciences · doi:10.1177/00483931231172455 · Cited by 13
Metrics in biodiversity conservation and the value-free ideal
Bocchi, F. (2024) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-024-04561-8 · Cited by 12
Managing value‐laden judgements in regulatory science and risk assessment
Elliott, K. C. (2019) · EFSA Journal · doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2019.e170709 · Cited by 13
Self-citationScience communication: challenges and dilemmas in the age of COVID-19
Antiochou, K. (2021) · History & Philosophy of the Life Sciences · doi:10.1007/s40656-021-00444-0 · Cited by 14
Mertz, M., Prince, I., & Pietschmann, I. (2023) · Metamedicine · doi:10.1007/s11017-023-09640-4 · Cited by 12
Revisiting the adequacy of the economic policy narrative underpinning the Green Revolution
van Etten, J. (2022) · Agriculture and Human Values · doi:10.1007/s10460-022-10325-2 · Cited by 12
Tang, B. L. (2024) · Research Ethics · doi:10.1177/17470161231221258 · Cited by 11
On masks and masking: epistemic harms and science communication
Intemann, K. K., & de Melo‐Martín, I. (2023) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-023-04322-z · Cited by 12
Experts and Politics in the German Nuclear Waste Governance
Losada, A. M. I., Themann, D., & Nucci, M. R. D. (2019) · Energiepolitik und Klimaschutz · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-27107-7_12 · Cited by 11
The epistemic impact of theorizing: generation bias implies evaluation bias
Dellsén, F. (2019) · Philosophical Studies · doi:10.1007/s11098-019-01387-w · Cited by 11
Kourany, J. A. (2020) · Canadian Journal of Philosophy · doi:10.1017/can.2020.34 · Cited by 11
The manufacturing of consensus: A struggle for epistemic authority in chemical risk evaluation
McIlroy‐Young, B., Öberg, G., & Leopold, A. (2021) · Environmental Science & Policy · doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2021.04.003 · Cited by 11
Autonomous artificial intelligence, scientific research, and human values
Resnik, D. B., Hosseini, M., & Hauswald, R. (2026) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-025-00908-0 · Cited by 15
Eudaimonia in the Amazon: Relational Values as a Deep Leverage Point to Curb Tropical Deforestation
Lopes, G. R., & Lima, M. G. B. (2023) · Conservation · doi:10.3390/conservation3010016 · Cited by 10
Friend or Foe? Rethinking Epistemic Trespassing
Pavličić, J., Dimitrijević, J., Vučković, A., Đorđević, S., Nedeljković, A., & Tešić, Ž. (2023) · Social Epistemology · doi:10.1080/02691728.2023.2286255 · Cited by 10
Concerns about Contextual Values in Science and the Legitimate/Illegitimate Distinction
de Melo‐Martín, I. (2024) · Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1017/psa.2024.20 · Cited by 10
A better how: notes on developmental meta-research
Forscher, P. S., & Schmidt, M. (2024) · doi:10.62372/isci6112 · Cited by 19
Clahsen, S., van Klaveren, H., Vermeire, T. G., KAMP, I. V., Garssen, B. B. G., Piersma, A. H., & Lebret, E. (2019) · Journal of Risk Research · doi:10.1080/13669877.2018.1517378 · Cited by 11
Injustice in the Spaces between Concepts
Fairbairn, F. (2020) · The Southern Journal of Philosophy · doi:10.1111/sjp.12349 · Cited by 10
Epistemic risks in cancer screening: Implications for ethics and policy
Biddle, J. B. (2019) · Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.shpsc.2019.101200 · Cited by 10
Inductive Risk, Science, and Values: A Reply to MacGillivray
Hicks, D., Magnus, P. D., & Wright, J. (2019) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/risa.13434 · Cited by 10
The Behavioral Economics of Biodiversity Conservation Scientists
Vellend, M. (2019) · Philosophical Topics · doi:10.5840/philtopics201947112 · Cited by 10
How to Handle Reasonable Scientific Disagreement: The Case of COVID-19
Antiochou, K., & Psillos, S. (2022) · Argumentation library · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-91017-4_4 · Cited by 9
Speech Act Theory and the Multiple Aims of Science
Franco, P. L. (2019) · Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1086/705452 · Cited by 10
Popa, E. (2022) · SATS · doi:10.1515/sats-2021-0017 · Cited by 9
Conceptualizing “positive attributes” across psychological perspectives
Wilson, D., Ng, V., Alonso, N. A., Jeffrey, A., & Tay, L. (2023) · Journal of Personality · doi:10.1111/jopy.12873 · Cited by 9
Articulating the social responsibilities of translational science
Smith, E. M. R., Molldrem, S., Farroni, J. S., & Tumilty, E. (2024) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-023-02597-8 · Cited by 9
How Do Students Critically Evaluate Outdated Language That Relates to Gender in Biology?
Dunk, R. D. P., Malmquist, S. J., Prescott, K., Ewell, S. N., Henning, J. A., & Ballen, C. J. (2024) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.23-07-0125 · Cited by 9
Polarization in research: What is it, why is it problematic, and how can it be addressed?
Hofmann, B. (2024) · Accountability in Research · doi:10.1080/08989621.2024.2440096 · Cited by 9
An ethical obligation to ignore the unreliable
Holman, B. (2019) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-019-02483-4 · Cited by 9
Krauß, A., & Colombo, M. (2020) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0234036 · Cited by 8
A Reformed Division of Labor for the Science of Well-Being
Fumagalli, R. (2022) · Philosophy · doi:10.1017/s0031819122000092 · Cited by 9
The Epistemic Projection Approach to Values in Science
Parker, W. S. (2023) · Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1017/psa.2023.107 · Cited by 9
Values in public health: an argument from trust
Popa, E. (2024) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-024-04650-8 · Cited by 9
KNOWING HOW as a philosophical hybrid
Gonnerman, C., Mortensen, K., & Robbins, J. (2021) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-021-03292-4 · Cited by 9
Roles for Values in Scientific Activities
LACEY, H. M. (2018) · Axiomathes · doi:10.1007/s10516-018-9386-2 · Cited by 9
Science, Values, and the Priority of Evidence
Magnus, P. D. (2018) · Logos & Episteme · doi:10.5840/logos-episteme20189433 · Cited by 9
Wishful Thinking and Values in Science
Steel, D. (2018) · Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1086/699714 · Cited by 13
“The value-free ideal, the autonomy thesis, and cognitive diversity”
Politi, V. (2024) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-024-04673-1 · Cited by 8
Against global aims for science: values, epistemic priority, and a local aims approach
Lusk, G., & Elliott, K. C. (2024) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-024-04633-9 · Cited by 8
Self-citationGibbs, N., Angus, C., Dixon, S., Parry, C. D. H., & Meier, P. S. (2023) · Applied Health Economics and Health Policy · doi:10.1007/s40258-023-00789-6 · Cited by 8
Bihan, S. L. (2023) · Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1017/psa.2023.119 · Cited by 12
Navigating dissent by managing value judgments: the case of Lyme disease
Elliott, K. C. (2023) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-023-04368-z · Cited by 8
Self-citationHansson, S. O. (2020) · Boston studies in the philosophy of science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-29179-2_16 · Cited by 8
On Trusting Neighbors More Than Experts: An Ebola Case Study
Furman, K. (2020) · Frontiers in Communication · doi:10.3389/fcomm.2020.00023 · Cited by 8
Bavli, I., & Steel, D. P. (2020) · Public Health Ethics · doi:10.1093/phe/phaa031 · Cited by 8
Małecka, M. (2021) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-021-03026-6 · Cited by 10
Science as Experience: A Deweyan Model of Science Communication
Halpern, M., & Elliott, K. (2021) · Perspectives in Science · doi:10.1162/posc_a_00398 · Cited by 7
Self-citationOn the mitigation of inductive risk
Contessa, G. (2021) · European Journal for Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1007/s13194-021-00381-6 · Cited by 7
Formal models of the scientific community and the value-ladenness of science
Politi, V. (2021) · European Journal for Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1007/s13194-021-00418-w · Cited by 9
Values in Psychological Science
Osbeck, L. M. (2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781316471302 · Cited by 28
Schniedermann, A. (2022) · Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics · doi:10.3389/frma.2022.846822 · Cited by 13
How (not) to be held accountable in research: The case of the Dutch integrity code
Radder, H. (2022) · Accountability in Research · doi:10.1080/08989621.2022.2115888 · Cited by 7
Schwenkenbecher, A., Hewitt, C. L., Heesen, R., Campbell, M. L., Fritsch, O., Knight, A. T., & Nash, E. J. (2023) · Frontiers in Marine Science · doi:10.3389/fmars.2023.1178949 · Cited by 7
Can We Talk About Feminist Epistemic Values Beyond Gender? Lessons from the Gut Microbiome
Schneider, T. (2019) · Biological Theory · doi:10.1007/s13752-019-00335-5 · Cited by 7
The Mindful Scientist: How Meditation Could Support Ethical Scientific Practice
Berryman, K., Lin, Y., Lazar, S. W., Parra, D. C., & Bernstein, A. (2025) · Mindfulness · doi:10.1007/s12671-025-02646-0 · Cited by 6
Hufendiek, R. (2020) · Journal of Social Philosophy · doi:10.1111/josp.12389 · Cited by 6
Exploring Scientists’ Values by Analyzing How They Frame Nature and Uncertainty
Vazquez, M., McIlroy‐Young, B., Steel, D. P., Giang, A., & Öberg, G. (2021) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/risa.13701 · Cited by 6
Enhanced Epistemic Trust and the Value-Free Ideal as a Social Indicator of Trust
Branch, T. Y. (2022) · Social Epistemology · doi:10.1080/02691728.2022.2114114 · Cited by 6
What matters: Conservation values in invasion science
Vermeulen, L., Bovenkerk, B., & Turnhout, E. (2024) · Environmental Values · doi:10.1177/09632719241304951 · Cited by 5
Exploratory Scoping of Place‐Based Opportunities for Convergence Research
Helgeson, C., Auermuller, L., Gayle, D. B., Dangendorf, S., Gilmore, E., Keller, K. M., Kopp, R. E., Lorenzo‐Trueba, J., Oppenheimer, M., Parrish, K. S., et al. (2025) · Earth s Future · doi:10.1029/2024ef004908 · Cited by 6
Stakes Sensitivity and Credit Rating: A New Challenge for Regulators
Booth, A. R., & de Bruin, B. (2019) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-019-04260-2 · Cited by 6
The Hows and whys of philosophy of science teaching: a comparative analysis
de Regt, H. W., & Koster, E. (2021) · European Journal for Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1007/s13194-021-00421-1 · Cited by 6
Ramachandran, A., Mouat, I. C., & Öberg, G. (2022) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.21768 · Cited by 8
Tang, B. L. (2023) · Ethics & Behavior · doi:10.1080/10508422.2023.2208245 · Cited by 6
The value-free ideal in codes of conduct for research integrity
Ambrosj, J., Desmond, H., & Dierickx, K. (2023) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-023-04377-y · Cited by 6
THOMAS KUHN’S THEORY OF RATIONALITY
Pirozelli, P. (2019) · Manuscrito · doi:10.1590/0100-6045.2019.v42n3.pp · Cited by 6
Model uncertainty, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the science-policy interface
Thorén, H., & Gerlee, P. (2024) · Royal Society Open Science · doi:10.1098/rsos.230803 · Cited by 7
A temperature check on climate communication: where are we?
Strydhorst, N. A. (2025) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-025-04585-6 · Cited by 5
Public reason, values in science, and the shifting boundaries of the political forum
Badano, G. (2025) · Philosophical Studies · doi:10.1007/s11098-025-02323-x · Cited by 5
A Philosophy of the Humanities
Grimm, S. R., Peels, R., & van Woudenberg, R. (2025) · doi:10.1093/9780197749647.001.0001 · Cited by 5
Building community capacity with philosophy: Toolbox dialogue and climate resilience
Cwik, B., Gonnerman, C., O’Rourke, M. J. E., Robinson, B., & Schoonmaker, D. (2022) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-13282-270221 · Cited by 5
Brigandt, I. (2025) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781009496407 · Cited by 5
Rebuttal to Douglas and Elliott
Hudson, R. G. S. (2022) · Journal for General Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1007/s10838-022-09616-3 · Cited by 5
Moralisation of medicines: The case of hydroxychloroquine
Lalumera, E. (2023) · European Journal for Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1007/s13194-023-00542-9 · Cited by 5
Codes of conduct should help scientists navigate societal expectations
Ambrosj, J., Dierickx, K., & Desmond, H. (2024) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-024-03261-5 · Cited by 5
Ambrosj, J., Desmond, H., & Dierickx, K. (2024) · Accountability in Research · doi:10.1080/08989621.2024.2423358 · Cited by 5
Characterizing the Value-Free Ideal: From a Dichotomy to a Multiplicity
Elliott, K. C. (2025) · Boston studies in the philosophy of science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-92958-8_16 · Cited by 5
Self-citationDRUG FACTS, VALUES, AND THE MORNING-AFTER PILL
ChoGlueck, C. (2021) · Public Affairs Quarterly · doi:10.2307/27009635 · Cited by 5
Values as heuristics: a contextual empiricist account of assessing values scientifically
ChoGlueck, C., & Lloyd, E. A. (2023) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-023-04198-z · Cited by 5
Precise Yet Uncertain: Broadening Understandings of Uncertainty and Policy in the BPA Controversy
Lemus, D., & Kovacic, Z. (2021) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/risa.13860 · Cited by 5
Research in the multiplex: navigating tensions and opportunities in transdisciplinary environments
Leonelli, S., & Trappes, R. (2025) · European Journal for Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1007/s13194-025-00684-y · Cited by 4
The Philosophy of Ecology: An Introduction
Justus, J. (2021) · Cited by 4
The algorithmic turn in conservation biology: Characterizing progress in ethically-driven sciences
Justus, J., & Wakil, S. (2021) · Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A · doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2021.05.013 · Cited by 4
Simulation models and probabilities: a Bayesian defense of the value-free ideal
Cassini, A. (2021) · SIMULATION · doi:10.1177/00375497211028815 · Cited by 4
The usefulness of well-being temporalism
Hersch, G. (2022) · Journal of Economic Methodology · doi:10.1080/1350178x.2022.2129736 · Cited by 5
A Rawlsian Solution to the New Demarcation Problem
Cabrera, F. (2022) · Canadian Journal of Philosophy · doi:10.1017/can.2023.19 · Cited by 4
Otto Neurath: The Philosopher in the Cave
Howard, D. A. (2019) · Boston studies in the philosophy of science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-02128-3_3 · Cited by 4
The Kaleidoscope of Citizen ScienceCommentary
Elliott, K. C. (2019) · Narrative Inquiry in Bioethics · doi:10.1353/nib.2019.0017 · Cited by 4
Self-citationHassall, K., Gullickson, A. M., Boyce, A. S., & Hannum, K. M. (2020) · Evaluation Journal of Australasia · doi:10.1177/1035719x20931250 · Cited by 4
Behrend, L. (2024) · Planning Theory · doi:10.1177/14730952241279633 · Cited by 3
Community science and the value-free ideal
Quinn, A. (2025) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-025-04955-2 · Cited by 3
The Promise and Perils of NGO‐Supported Science
de Souza, P. B., & Elliott, K. C. (2025) · Philosophy Compass · doi:10.1111/phc3.70043 · Cited by 3
Self-citationStudent Perceptions on the Value of an Ideologically Aware Curriculum
Dunk, R. D. P., Adams, P. E., Beatty, A. E., & Ballen, C. J. (2025) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.24-05-0149 · Cited by 3
Epistemic rights in tension and accord: Expanding the analysis of source evaluation criteria
Chinn, C. A., Barzilai, S., & Elby, A. (2025) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2025.2584975 · Cited by 5
Science Shouldn't Be Political
Hyde, B. V. E. (2026) · Journal of Academic Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10805-025-09717-w · Cited by 4
Normative empirical concepts – a practical guiding tool for economists
van Staveren, I. (2024) · Journal of Economic Methodology · doi:10.1080/1350178x.2024.2376557 · Cited by 3
van Basshuysen, P. (2025) · European Journal for Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1007/s13194-025-00705-w · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Elliott, K. C.
- Corresponding author
- Elliott, Kevin C.
- ORCID
- Elliott, Kevin C.
- Venue
- Oxford University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press
- Published
- 2017-02-03
- OpenAlex
- W2577177528
- Cited by
- 343
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 28 · 2025: 64 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 47 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 26.51
- Type
- book
- Language
- fi
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy of Biology and Scientific Explanation
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Logic and Philosophy of Science
- Keywords
- values in science, value-free ideal, scientific objectivity, stakeholder engagement, science and ethics, climate science, chemical risk assessment, biomedical research, science communication, scientific uncertainty
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