Societal Consideration as Willingness to Dialogue - A Commentary to Singapore Statement Point N. 14

Daniele Fanelli; Leiv K. Sydnes; Howard Ducharme; Merry Bullock; Gary Comstock; Carthage Smith; Inmaculada de Melo-Martin; Susan V. Zimmerman; Mark S. Frankel

doi:10.1142/9789814632393_0033

Societal Consideration as Willingness to Dialogue - A Commentary to Singapore Statement Point N. 14

Daniele Fanelli, Leiv K. Sydnes, Howard Ducharme, Merry Bullock, Gary Comstock, Carthage Smith, Inmaculada de Melo-Martin, Susan V. Zimmerman, Mark S. Frankel

School of Social Sciences

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter

Abstract

The hundreds of attendees who, at the Second World Conference on Research Integrity, discussed and voted on the Singapore Statement generally agreed on all points, except one: should the Statement include a point about social responsibility? The lively debate that ensued led to the inclusion of point number 14, a general recommendation that: “Researchers and research institutions should recognize that they have an ethical obligation to weigh societal benefits against risks inherent in their work” (see http://www.singaporestatement.org/statement.html). This appeal seems to leave many questions to be answered, and gives little practical guidance.

Original language	English
Title of host publication	Integrity in the Global Research Arena
Publisher	World Scientific Publishing
Pages	269-277
Number of pages	9
ISBN (Electronic)	9789814632409
ISBN (Print)	9789814632386
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814632393_0033
Publication status	Published - May 2015

Access to Document

10.1142/9789814632393_0033

Cite this

Fanelli, D., Sydnes, L. K., Ducharme, H., Bullock, M., Comstock, G., Smith, C., de Melo-Martin, I., Zimmerman, S. V., & Frankel, M. S. (2015). Societal Consideration as Willingness to Dialogue - A Commentary to Singapore Statement Point N. 14. In Integrity in the Global Research Arena (pp. 269-277). World Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814632393_0033

@inbook{8251787af6c548878b16f26fc9ad4c1e,

title = "Societal Consideration as Willingness to Dialogue - A Commentary to Singapore Statement Point N. 14",

abstract = "The hundreds of attendees who, at the Second World Conference on Research Integrity, discussed and voted on the Singapore Statement generally agreed on all points, except one: should the Statement include a point about social responsibility? The lively debate that ensued led to the inclusion of point number 14, a general recommendation that: “Researchers and research institutions should recognize that they have an ethical obligation to weigh societal benefits against risks inherent in their work” (see http://www.singaporestatement.org/statement.html). This appeal seems to leave many questions to be answered, and gives little practical guidance.",

author = "Daniele Fanelli and Sydnes, {Leiv K.} and Howard Ducharme and Merry Bullock and Gary Comstock and Carthage Smith and {de Melo-Martin}, Inmaculada and Zimmerman, {Susan V.} and Frankel, {Mark S.}",

year = "2015",

month = may,

doi = "10.1142/9789814632393_0033",

language = "English",

isbn = "9789814632386",

pages = "269--277",

booktitle = "Integrity in the Global Research Arena",

publisher = "World Scientific Publishing",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Societal Consideration as Willingness to Dialogue - A Commentary to Singapore Statement Point N. 14

AU - Fanelli, Daniele

AU - Sydnes, Leiv K.

AU - Ducharme, Howard

AU - Bullock, Merry

AU - Comstock, Gary

AU - Smith, Carthage

AU - de Melo-Martin, Inmaculada

AU - Zimmerman, Susan V.

AU - Frankel, Mark S.

PY - 2015/5

Y1 - 2015/5

N2 - The hundreds of attendees who, at the Second World Conference on Research Integrity, discussed and voted on the Singapore Statement generally agreed on all points, except one: should the Statement include a point about social responsibility? The lively debate that ensued led to the inclusion of point number 14, a general recommendation that: “Researchers and research institutions should recognize that they have an ethical obligation to weigh societal benefits against risks inherent in their work” (see http://www.singaporestatement.org/statement.html). This appeal seems to leave many questions to be answered, and gives little practical guidance.

AB - The hundreds of attendees who, at the Second World Conference on Research Integrity, discussed and voted on the Singapore Statement generally agreed on all points, except one: should the Statement include a point about social responsibility? The lively debate that ensued led to the inclusion of point number 14, a general recommendation that: “Researchers and research institutions should recognize that they have an ethical obligation to weigh societal benefits against risks inherent in their work” (see http://www.singaporestatement.org/statement.html). This appeal seems to leave many questions to be answered, and gives little practical guidance.

U2 - 10.1142/9789814632393_0033

DO - 10.1142/9789814632393_0033

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9789814632386

SP - 269

EP - 277

BT - Integrity in the Global Research Arena

PB - World Scientific Publishing

ER -

Societal Consideration as Willingness to Dialogue - A Commentary to Singapore Statement Point N. 14

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this