The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Reputation and Power: Organizational Image and Pharmaceutical Regulation at the FDA
Abstract
How the FDA became the world's most powerful regulatory agency The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is the most powerful regulatory agency in the world. How did the FDA become so influential? And how exactly does it wield its extraordinary power? Reputation and Power traces the history of FDA regulation of pharmaceuticals, revealing how the agency's organizational reputation has been the primary source of its power, yet also one of its ultimate constraints. Daniel Carpenter describes how the FDA cultivated a reputation for competence and vigilance throughout the last century, and how this organizational image has enabled the agency to regulate an industry as powerful as American pharmaceuticals while resisting efforts to curb its own authority. Carpenter explains how the FDA's reputation and power have played out among committees in Congress, and with drug companies, advocacy groups, the media, research hospitals and universities, and governments in Europe and India. He shows how FDA regulatory power has influenced the way that business, medicine, and science are conducted in the United States and worldwide. Along the way, Carpenter offers new insights into the therapeutic revolution of the 1940s and 1950s; the 1980s AIDS crisis; the advent of oral contraceptives and cancer chemotherapy; the rise of antiregulatory conservatism; and the FDA's waning influence in drug regulation today. Reputation and Power demonstrates how reputation shapes the power and behavior of government agencies, and sheds new light on how that power is used and contested. Some images inside the book are unavailable due to digital copyright restrictions.
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.
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
Cited by
Assessing the Gold Standard — Lessons from the History of RCTs
Bothwell, L. E., Greene, J. A., Podolsky, S. H., & Jones, D. S. (2016) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmms1604593 · Cited by 664
Reputation and Public Administration
Carpenter, D. P., & Krause, G. A. (2012) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02506.x · Cited by 549
Self-citationCisplatin in the modern era: The backbone of first-line chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer
Fennell, D. A., Summers, Y., Cadranel, J., Benepal, T., Christoph, D. C., Lal, R., Das, M., Maxwell, F., Visseren-Grul, C., & Ferry, D. (2016) · Cancer Treatment Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.ctrv.2016.01.003 · Cited by 382
The Reputational Basis of Public Accountability
Busuioc, E. M., & Lodge, M. (2016) · Governance · doi:10.1111/gove.12161 · Cited by 306
Has the tobacco industry evaded the FDA's ban on ‘Light’ cigarette descriptors?
Connolly, G. N., & Alpert, H. R. (2014) · Tobacco Control · doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2012-050746 · Cited by 61
Metadata
- Authors
- Carpenter, D.
- Venue
- Princeton University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Princeton University Press
- Published
- 2014-12-31
- OpenAlex
- W216342353
- Cited by
- 848
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 101.95
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reputation and Power: Organizational Image and Pharmaceutical Regulation at the FDA. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1515/9781400835119
- The paper
- Carpenter, D. (2014). Reputation and Power: Organizational Image and Pharmaceutical Regulation at the FDA. Princeton University Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400835119
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.