David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (4):699-717 (2012)
Dependence in nanotechnology on external funding and academic-industry relationships has led to questions concerning its influence on research directions, as well as the potential for conflicts of interest to arise and impact scientific integrity and public trust. This study uses a survey of 193 nanotechnology industry and academic researchers to explore whether they share similar concerns. Although these concerns are not unique to nanotechnology, its emerging nature and the prominence of industry funding lend credence to understanding its researchers’ views, as these researchers are shaping the norms and direction of the field. The results of the survey show general agreement that funding sources are influencing research directions in nanotechnology; many respondents saw this influence in their own work as well as other researchers’ work. Respondents also agreed that funding considerations were likely to influence whether researchers shared their results. Irrespective of their institutional affiliation or funding status, twice as many researchers as not considered financial conflicts of interest a cause for concern, and three times as many respondents as not disagreed financial conflicts of interest in nanotechnology were uncommon. Only a third was satisfied with the way that conflicts of interest are currently managed and believed current procedures would protect the integrity of nanotechnology research. The results also found differences in views depending on researchers’ institutional affiliation and funding status.
|Keywords||Conflicts of interest University-industry relationships Faculty surveys Research support|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
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
Jessica S. Ancker & Annette Flanagin (2007). A Comparison of Conflict of Interest Policies at Peer-Reviewed Journals in Different Scientific Disciplines. Science and Engineering Ethics 13 (2):147-157.
Stephanie J. Bird (2005). The Complexity of Competing and Conflicting Interests. Science and Engineering Ethics 11 (4):515-517.
Marek Czarkowski (2006). The Protection of Patients' Rights in Clinical Trials. Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (1):131-138.
Michael Davis & Andrew Stark (eds.) (2001). Conflict of Interest in the Professions. Oxford University Press.
Michael JG Farthing (2006). Authors and Publication Practices. Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (1):41-52.
Citations of this work BETA
Gina M. Eosco, Meghnaa Tallapragada, Katherine A. McComas & Merrill Brady (2014). Exploring Societal and Ethical Views of Nanotechnology REUs. NanoEthics 8 (1):91-99.
Similar books and articles
Brian Schrag, Gloria Ferrell, Vivian Weil, Tristan J. Fiedler, Gloria Ferrell, Vivian Weil & Tristan J. Fiedler (2003). Barking Up the Wrong Tree? Industry Funding of Academic Research. Science and Engineering Ethics 9 (4):569-582.
Robert McGinn (2008). Ethics and Nanotechnology: Views of Nanotechnology Researchers. [REVIEW] NanoEthics 2 (2):101-131.
Paul J. Friedman (2002). The Impact of Conflict of Interest on Trust in Science. Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (3):413-420.
Jason Borenstein & Yvette E. Pearson (2008). Taking Conflicts of Interest Seriously Without Overdoing It: Promises and Perils of Academic-Industry Partnerships. [REVIEW] Journal of Academic Ethics 6 (3):229-243.
Chris MacDonald, Michael McDonald & Wayne Norman (2002). Charitable Conflicts of Interest. Journal of Business Ethics 39 (1-2):67 - 74.
Sharmon Sollitto, Sharona Hoffman, Maxwell J. Mehlman, Robert J. Lederman, Stuart J. Youngner & Michael M. Lederman (2003). Intrinsic Conflicts of Interest in Clinical Research: A Need for Disclosure. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 13 (2):83-91.
Paul J. Friedman (1992). The Troublesome Semantics of Conflict of Interest. Ethics and Behavior 2 (4):245 – 251.
Richard Carter (2010). Commercialism and Universities: An Ethical Analysis. [REVIEW] Journal of Academic Ethics 8 (1):1-19.
E. Schuller (2004). Perception of Risk and Nanotechnology. In Baird D. (ed.), Discovering the Nanoscale. Ios
Bonnie E. Glaser & Lisa A. Bero (2005). Attitudes of Academic and Clinical Researchers Toward Financial Ties in Research: A Systematic Review. Science and Engineering Ethics 11 (4):553-573.
Imogen Evans (2002). Conflict of Interest: The Importance of Potential. Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (3):393-396.
Heidi Jiao (2010). Proposed Strategies for Teaching Ethics of Nanotechnology. NanoEthics 4 (3):221-228.
Joachim Schummer, Reading Nano: The Public Interest in Nanotechnology as Reflected in Purchase Patterns of Books.
Nael Barakat & Heidi Jiao (2010). Proposed Strategies for Teaching Ethics of Nanotechnology. NanoEthics 4 (3):221-228.
Added to index2011-02-21
Total downloads9 ( #231,597 of 1,700,378 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #362,609 of 1,700,378 )
How can I increase my downloads?