EDITOR’S NOTE: Business Ethics Quarterly invited a number of scholars involved with BEQ over its first twenty years (especially in its early years, as editors or editorial board members) to offer their reflections on the past, present, and future of business ethics. The resulting comments, which appear below, are as diverse and eclectic as the group of scholars who have given their energies to BEQ over the years.

This issue was published in the framework of a program that has been made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United States Department of State. The contents are the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of State or the United States Government.

The article presents the author’s reflection on the topic of scientific communication and forms of presentation of scientific results in the form of journal publications. As a starting point for reflection served the meeting that took place on March 28, 2019 held by the editor-in-chief of the Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences Khachatur Marinosyan with new researchers. The event was mainly devoted to the structure of the representation of modern knowledge, a crucial role in which is continued (...) to be played by a scientific journal that should be considered as a special phenomenon of intellectual culture. The operation of a journal is considered from the communicative perspective. In addition to the main topics of scientific communication, during the meeting some relevant to the institutional functioning of knowledge topics were also discussed: ageism, interdisciplinarity, transmedia, formalization of knowledge, international unification and formal indexation of journals. The meeting, which format was unusual for contemporary Russian science, aroused the interest of the professional community. The relevance and just-in-time character of the “dialogical” approach to the functioning of science was evidenced by the participants. The Social Philosophy Department of the Institute of Philosophy of Russian Academy of Sciences hosted the meeting, which was attended by the beginning scientists from Lomonosov Moscow State University, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences and independent researchers who do not have an institutional position in academic institutions but are engaged in research activities. The most important conclusion of the meeting is that there are the possibility and necessity of thematic updating of humanitarian and, in particular, philosophical knowledge by the work of beginning but promising authors, and editorial boards should be ready to that if they want to maintain journal’s leading status and keep up with the times. (shrink)

Postmodernity has brought new forms of social control which are exercised through new forms of communication. Paradoxically, however, postmodernity also seemed to be heading towards the exaltation of the individual in their absolute freedom. The 20 th century pushed, in the name of science and progress, the secularization of Western societies, often distancing people from their traditional community ties, including ties to the ecclesial community. Thus, the postmodern individual initially appeared free of ancestral community pressures. However, subtle new forms (...) of social control have replaced traditional ones. Mechanisms such as social media, new forms of work and sexual exploitation, or the impossibility of maintaining privacy in the face of the power of private and public corporations, thus expose the individual to the asocial elements. Frequently, these new social control mechanisms (a clear example being the leadership of the WHO in the policies implemented worldwide during the COVID-19 pandemic) are presented to us not as repressive, but scientifically and paternally protective. In this context, the vindication of religious freedom and the community experience of faith represent decisive touchstones for the vitality and validity of a social and political order in which the personal being is truly the highest value. The authors of this monograph are professors, some of them with twenty or thirty years of university teaching, others halfway between Generation X and Y, but all with a deep vocation as teachers called to understanding the world around them. A vocation to collaborate with their students so that the seed of love for the knowledge of reality and the joyful experience of contact with the truth may bear fruit in them. Such an experience only makes sense as a shared experience. And this is what the authors of this monograph usually do: share their concerns, worries, and research. In formal terms, this shared experience has been developing in recent times under the mantle of research projects such as the one that forms the basis of this issue of _Scientia et Fides_: “Social Control, Postmodernism and Political Community” (COSOPOC). Sharing the results of their research is also a way of inviting the specialized public to this experience without forgetting that the first circle of this community work is formed by the students themselves, whom this monograph aims to serve as a stimulus in their personal trajectories as students, as future professionals and, above all, as people in charge of their actions and responsible and capable of facing the worrying challenges that face us all. (from the Editorial). (shrink)

This article investigates whether editorial board members of selected economic journals publish their research papers in their ‘own’ journal. Journals were selected from the Journal Citation Report® from the categories Business; Business, Finance; and Economics. Only research articles published between 2012 and 2015 were included in the analysis. We recorded ratios concerning the share of articles authored by editorial board members, the share of editorial board members publishing in their own journals and (...) ratios representing their publication output. The average share of articles authored by editorial board members ranges from 0.6 to 17.5%. The average share of editorial board members publishing in their own journals ranges from 5.6 to 24.4%. Considering only editorial board members publishing in their own journals, the share of their articles in their journals ranges from 8.2 to 71.4%. While the share of board members publishing only in their own journals, to the number of board members publishing in their own journals, the ratio in a quarter of journals is equal to zero, with a maximum reach of 85.7%. All observed ratios are significantly positively correlated with the gap between impact factor and impact factor without Journal Self Cites; and negatively correlated with the Article Influence Score. A cluster of journals in which a high proportion of editorial board members publish and simultaneously these members publish in their own journal at a high rate was identified. (shrink)

In a recent opinion paper, it was argued that individuals with multiple retractions or a record of academic misconduct should not serve as editors, including as editors-in-chief, on the editorial boards of scholarly or academic journals. As a first step towards appreciating how such a policy could be applied in practice, the presence of 30 individuals listed on the Retraction Watch Leaderboard on editorial boards was screened. Six cases are highlighted to gain an appreciation of the potential reputational (...) risks that journals and publishers might incur by including individuals with a tainted academic record on editorial boards. Given the reputational, legal and other risks associated with this type of assessment and decision, more formal positioning and guidance are needed by global ethics policy-related bodies such as COPE, the ICMJE, and the CSE, even more so in journals that claim to follow these organizations’ ethical guidelines. (shrink)

The rapidly changing field of genetics affects society through advances in health-care and through implications of genetic research. This study addresses the impacts of new genetic discoveries and technologies on different segments of today's society. The book begins with a chapter on genetic complexity, and subsequent chapters discuss moral and ethical questions arising from today's genetics from the perspectives of health care professionals, the media, the general public, special interest groups and commercial interests.

In the academic world, despite their corrective nature, there is still a negative stigma attached to retractions, even more so if they are based on ethical infractions. Editors-in-chief and editors are role models in academic and scholarly communities. Thus, if they have multiple retractions or a record of academic misconduct, this viewpoint argues that they should not serve on journals’ editorial boards. The exception is where such individuals have displayed a clear path of scholarly reform. Policy and guidance is (...) needed by organizations such as the Committee on Publication Ethics. (shrink)

Doctoral programs at U.S. universities play a critical role in the development of human resources both in the United States and abroad. This volume reports the results of an extensive study of U.S. research-doctorate programs in five broad fields: physical sciences and mathematics, engineering, social and behavioral sciences, biological sciences, and the humanities. Research-Doctorate Programs in the United States documents changes that have taken place in the size, structure, and quality of doctoral education since the widely (...) used 1982 editions. This update provides selected information on nearly 4,000 doctoral programs in 41 subdisciplines at 274 doctorate-granting institutions. This volume also reports the results of the National Survey of Graduate Faculty, which polled a sample of faculty for their views on the scholarly quality of program faculty and the effectiveness of doctoral programs in preparing research scholars/scientists. This much-anticipated update of such an essential reference will be useful to education administrators, university faculty, and students seeking authoritative information on doctoral programs. (shrink)

Libertarian Papers is pleased to announce that Peter Klein, Associate Professor of Applied Social Sciences and Director of the McQuinn Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership at the University of Missouri, has joined the Editorial Board.

Aims and Scope -/- The Vietnamese Social Sciences and Humanities at a Fork in the Road, utilizing an object-oriented structured database on the productivity of Vietnamese researchers, seeks to provide a comprehensive overview of the development of Social Sciences and Humanities in Vietnam from 2008 to 2018. -/- Quan-Hoang Vuong (Ph.D., Université Libre de Bruxelles) is the director of Centre for Interdisciplinary Social Research, Phenikaa University in Hanoi, Vietnam. He is chairman of the Vietnam chapter (...) of the European Association of Science Editors and serves in the NAFOSTED Scientific Council on Basic Research in the Social Sciences and Humanities (2019-2021). Dr. Vuong has published more than 120 academic articles, and book chapters in about 50 refereed journals and books by such publishers as Elsevier, Inderscience, Nature Publishing Group, Springer, Praeger, Wiley, World Scientific, etc. -/- Trung Tran is an Associate Professor of Mathematics Education and works at Vietnam Academy for Ethnic Minorities. He is a member of the Vietnam chapter of The European Association of Science Editors (EASE), a leader of the Vietnamese Science Editors (VSE) Team, and a chairman of Editor's Board of Journal of Ethnic Minorities Research (ISSN: 0866-773X). (shrink)

Editorial introducing the Journal of Philosophy of Emotion, and the contents of its inaugural issue.

David Hume’s Treatise on Human Nature famously fell `deadborn from the press’ because it was too far ahead of its time. Basu’s book is one of a number published in recent years that suggest we are at last ready to put its precepts into action.1 Modern game theory provides a framework that makes Hume’s insights genuinely applicable, and I totally agree with Basu that this is not only the right way forward, but that it now looks increasingly likely that this (...) is the road that wil actualy be folowed ± not only in political economy, but across the board in the social sciences. (shrink)