Cargando…

Rethinking scientific responsibility

Researchers should be made co-responsible for the wider consequences of their research focus and the application of their findings. This paper describes a meta-reflection procedure that can be used as a tool to enhance scientific responsibility and reflective practice. The point of departure is that...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Forssén, Annika, Meland, Eivind, Hetlevik, Irene, Strand, Roger
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Group 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3088477/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21266389
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jme.2010.038828
_version_ 1782202901406416896
author Forssén, Annika
Meland, Eivind
Hetlevik, Irene
Strand, Roger
author_facet Forssén, Annika
Meland, Eivind
Hetlevik, Irene
Strand, Roger
author_sort Forssén, Annika
collection PubMed
description Researchers should be made co-responsible for the wider consequences of their research focus and the application of their findings. This paper describes a meta-reflection procedure that can be used as a tool to enhance scientific responsibility and reflective practice. The point of departure is that scientific practice is situated in power relations, has direction and, consequently, power implications. The contextual preconditions and implications of research should be stated and discussed openly. The reflection method aims at revealing both upstream elements, such as for instance preconceptions, and downstream elements, for example, public consequences of research. The validity of research might improve from such discussions. Validity should preferably be understood as a broader concept than the methodological concerns in science.
format Text
id pubmed-3088477
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BMJ Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30884772011-05-16 Rethinking scientific responsibility Forssén, Annika Meland, Eivind Hetlevik, Irene Strand, Roger J Med Ethics Research Ethics Researchers should be made co-responsible for the wider consequences of their research focus and the application of their findings. This paper describes a meta-reflection procedure that can be used as a tool to enhance scientific responsibility and reflective practice. The point of departure is that scientific practice is situated in power relations, has direction and, consequently, power implications. The contextual preconditions and implications of research should be stated and discussed openly. The reflection method aims at revealing both upstream elements, such as for instance preconceptions, and downstream elements, for example, public consequences of research. The validity of research might improve from such discussions. Validity should preferably be understood as a broader concept than the methodological concerns in science. BMJ Group 2011-01-25 2011-05 /pmc/articles/PMC3088477/ /pubmed/21266389 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jme.2010.038828 Text en © 2011, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/legalcode.
spellingShingle Research Ethics
Forssén, Annika
Meland, Eivind
Hetlevik, Irene
Strand, Roger
Rethinking scientific responsibility
title Rethinking scientific responsibility
title_full Rethinking scientific responsibility
title_fullStr Rethinking scientific responsibility
title_full_unstemmed Rethinking scientific responsibility
title_short Rethinking scientific responsibility
title_sort rethinking scientific responsibility
topic Research Ethics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3088477/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21266389
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jme.2010.038828
work_keys_str_mv AT forssenannika rethinkingscientificresponsibility
AT melandeivind rethinkingscientificresponsibility
AT hetlevikirene rethinkingscientificresponsibility
AT strandroger rethinkingscientificresponsibility