Prosocial motives underlie scientific censorship by scientists: A perspective and research agenda
Name:
rudolph-et-al-2023.pdf
Size:
2.592Mb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Final Published Version
Author
Clark, C.J.Jussim, L.
Frey, K.
Stevens, S.T.
al-Gharbi, M.
Aquino, K.
Bailey, J.M.
Barbaro, N.
Baumeister, R.F.
Bleske-Rechek, A.
Buss, D.
Ceci, S.
Giudice, M.D.
Ditto, P.H.
Forgas, J.P.
Geary, D.C.
Geher, G.
Haider, S.
Honeycutt, N.
Joshi, H.
Krylov, A.I.
Loftus, E.
Loury, G.
Lu, L.
Macy, M.
Martin, C.C.
McWhorter, J.
Miller, G.
Paresky, P.
Pinker, S.
Reilly, W.
Salmon, C.
Stewart-Williams, S.
Tetlock, P.E.
Williams, W.M.
Wilson, A.E.
Winegard, B.M.
Yancey, G.
von Hippel, F.A.
Affiliation
University of Arizona, Department of PhilosophyIssue Date
2023-11-20
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
National Academy of SciencesCitation
Clark, C. J., Jussim, L., Frey, K., Stevens, S. T., Al-Gharbi, M., Aquino, K., ... & von Hippel, W. (2023). Prosocial motives underlie scientific censorship by scientists: A perspective and research agenda. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120(48), e2301642120.Rights
© 2023 the Author(s). Published by PNAS. This open access article is distributed under Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CC BY).Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
Science is among humanity’s greatest achievements, yet scientific censorship is rarely studied empirically. We explore the social, psychological, and institutional causes and consequences of scientific censorship (defined as actions aimed at obstructing particular scientific ideas from reaching an audience for reasons other than low scientific quality). Popular narratives suggest that scientific censorship is driven by authoritarian officials with dark motives, such as dogmatism and intolerance. Our analysis suggests that scientific censorship is often driven by scientists, who are primarily motivated by self-protection, benevolence toward peer scholars, and prosocial concerns for the well-being of human social groups. This perspective helps explain both recent findings on scientific censorship and recent changes to scientific institutions, such as the use of harm-based criteria to evaluate research. We discuss unknowns surrounding the consequences of censorship and provide recommendations for improving transparency and accountability in scientific decision-making to enable the exploration of these unknowns. The benefits of censorship may sometimes outweigh costs. However, until costs and benefits are examined empirically, scholars on opposing sides of ongoing debates are left to quarrel based on competing values, assumptions, and intuitions. Copyright © 2023 the Author(s). Published by PNAS.Note
Open access articleISSN
0027-8424PubMed ID
37983511Version
Final Published Versionae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1073/pnas.2301642120
Scopus Count
Collections
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as © 2023 the Author(s). Published by PNAS. This open access article is distributed under Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CC BY).
Related articles
- Culture of Care: Organizational Responsibilities.
- Authors: Weichbrod RH, Thompson GA, Norton JN, Brown MJ, Symonowicz C, Medina LV, Bratcher NA, Buckmaster CA, Klein H, Anderson LC
- Issue date: 2018
- Censorship: Beware scientists wielding red pens.
- Authors: Penders B
- Issue date: 2017 Jan 18
- Preludes to the Inquisition: self-censorship in medieval astrological discourse.
- Authors: Avelar de Carvalho H
- Issue date: 2020 Jan
- [Johannes des Sacrobosco and the Sphere Tradition in Early Modern Catholic Censorship].
- Authors: Sander C
- Issue date: 2018 Dec
- Harm Hypervigilance in Public Reactions to Scientific Evidence.
- Authors: Clark CJ, Graso M, Redstone I, Tetlock PE
- Issue date: 2023 Jul