Cargando…

Neuroethics 1995–2012. A Bibliometric Analysis of the Guiding Themes of an Emerging Research Field

In bioethics, the first decade of the twenty-first century was characterized by the emergence of interest in the ethical, legal, and social aspects of neuroscience research. At the same time an ongoing extension of the topics and phenomena addressed by neuroscientists was observed alongside its rise...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Leefmann, Jon, Levallois, Clement, Hildt, Elisabeth
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4929847/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27445772
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00336
_version_ 1782440666689699840
author Leefmann, Jon
Levallois, Clement
Hildt, Elisabeth
author_facet Leefmann, Jon
Levallois, Clement
Hildt, Elisabeth
author_sort Leefmann, Jon
collection PubMed
description In bioethics, the first decade of the twenty-first century was characterized by the emergence of interest in the ethical, legal, and social aspects of neuroscience research. At the same time an ongoing extension of the topics and phenomena addressed by neuroscientists was observed alongside its rise as one of the leading disciplines in the biomedical science. One of these phenomena addressed by neuroscientists and moral psychologists was the neural processes involved in moral decision-making. Today both strands of research are often addressed under the label of neuroethics. To understand this development we recalled literature from 1995 to 2012 stored in the Mainz Neuroethics Database (i) to investigate the quantitative development of scientific publications in neuroethics; (ii) to explore changes in the topics of neuroethics research within the defined time interval; (iii) to illustrate the interdependence of different research topics within the neuroethics literature; (iv) to show the development of the distribution of neuroethics research on peer-reviewed journals; and (v) to display the academic background and affiliations of neuroethics researchers. Our analysis exposes that there has been a demonstrative increase of neuroethics research while the issues addressed under this label had mostly been present before the establishment of the field. We show that the research on the ethical, legal and social aspects of neuroscience research is hardly related to neuroscience research on moral decision-making and that the academic backgrounds and affiliations of many neuroethics researchers speak for a very close entanglement of neuroscience and neuroethics. As our article suggests that after more than one decade there still is no dominant agenda for the future of neuroethics research, it calls for more reflection about the theoretical underpinnings and prospects to establish neuroethics as a marked-off research field distinct from neuroscience and the diverse branches of bioethics.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4929847
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49298472016-07-21 Neuroethics 1995–2012. A Bibliometric Analysis of the Guiding Themes of an Emerging Research Field Leefmann, Jon Levallois, Clement Hildt, Elisabeth Front Hum Neurosci Neuroscience In bioethics, the first decade of the twenty-first century was characterized by the emergence of interest in the ethical, legal, and social aspects of neuroscience research. At the same time an ongoing extension of the topics and phenomena addressed by neuroscientists was observed alongside its rise as one of the leading disciplines in the biomedical science. One of these phenomena addressed by neuroscientists and moral psychologists was the neural processes involved in moral decision-making. Today both strands of research are often addressed under the label of neuroethics. To understand this development we recalled literature from 1995 to 2012 stored in the Mainz Neuroethics Database (i) to investigate the quantitative development of scientific publications in neuroethics; (ii) to explore changes in the topics of neuroethics research within the defined time interval; (iii) to illustrate the interdependence of different research topics within the neuroethics literature; (iv) to show the development of the distribution of neuroethics research on peer-reviewed journals; and (v) to display the academic background and affiliations of neuroethics researchers. Our analysis exposes that there has been a demonstrative increase of neuroethics research while the issues addressed under this label had mostly been present before the establishment of the field. We show that the research on the ethical, legal and social aspects of neuroscience research is hardly related to neuroscience research on moral decision-making and that the academic backgrounds and affiliations of many neuroethics researchers speak for a very close entanglement of neuroscience and neuroethics. As our article suggests that after more than one decade there still is no dominant agenda for the future of neuroethics research, it calls for more reflection about the theoretical underpinnings and prospects to establish neuroethics as a marked-off research field distinct from neuroscience and the diverse branches of bioethics. Frontiers Media S.A. 2016-07-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4929847/ /pubmed/27445772 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00336 Text en Copyright © 2016 Leefmann, Levallois and Hildt. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Leefmann, Jon
Levallois, Clement
Hildt, Elisabeth
Neuroethics 1995–2012. A Bibliometric Analysis of the Guiding Themes of an Emerging Research Field
title Neuroethics 1995–2012. A Bibliometric Analysis of the Guiding Themes of an Emerging Research Field
title_full Neuroethics 1995–2012. A Bibliometric Analysis of the Guiding Themes of an Emerging Research Field
title_fullStr Neuroethics 1995–2012. A Bibliometric Analysis of the Guiding Themes of an Emerging Research Field
title_full_unstemmed Neuroethics 1995–2012. A Bibliometric Analysis of the Guiding Themes of an Emerging Research Field
title_short Neuroethics 1995–2012. A Bibliometric Analysis of the Guiding Themes of an Emerging Research Field
title_sort neuroethics 1995–2012. a bibliometric analysis of the guiding themes of an emerging research field
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4929847/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27445772
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00336
work_keys_str_mv AT leefmannjon neuroethics19952012abibliometricanalysisoftheguidingthemesofanemergingresearchfield
AT levalloisclement neuroethics19952012abibliometricanalysisoftheguidingthemesofanemergingresearchfield
AT hildtelisabeth neuroethics19952012abibliometricanalysisoftheguidingthemesofanemergingresearchfield