Potential for Bias in the Context of Neuroethics

Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (3):593-600 (2012)
Abstract
Neuroscience research, like all science, is vulnerable to the influence of extraneous values in the practice of research, whether in research design or the selection, analysis and interpretation of data. This is particularly problematic for research into the biological mechanisms that underlie behavior, and especially the neurobiological underpinnings of moral development and ethical reasoning, decision-making and behavior, and the other elements of what is often called the neuroscience of ethics. The problem arises because neuroscientists, like most everyone, bring to their work assumptions, preconceptions and values and other sources of potentially inappropriate bias of which they may be unaware. It is important that the training of neuroscientists, and research practice itself, include open and in-depth discussion and examination of the assumptions that underlie research. Further, policy makers, journalists, and the general public, that is, the consumers of neuroscience research findings (and by extension, neurotechnologies) should be made aware of the limitations as well as the strengths of the science, the evolving nature of scientific understanding, and the often invisible values inherent in science
Keywords Bias in research  Neurobiology of ethics  Neuroethics  Neuroscience  Public policy  Research practice  Responsible conduct of research  RCR  Teaching neuroethics  Teaching neuroscience
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 11,365
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
Samuel A. Cartwright (2004). 'Report on the Diseases and Physical Peculiarities of the Negro Race. In Arthur Caplan, James J. McCartney & Dominic A. Sisti (eds.), Health, Disease, and Illness: Concepts in Medicine. Georgetown University Press. 28--39.

View all 10 references

Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles
Paul M. Churchland (1975). Two Grades of Evidential Bias. Philosophy of Science 42 (3):250-259.
Jessica Brown (2005). Williamson on Luminosity and Contextualism. Philosophical Quarterly 55 (219):319–327.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2012-09-22

Total downloads

3 ( #297,594 of 1,102,767 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #296,987 of 1,102,767 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.