Abstract
This study investigates the level of awareness about funding influences and potential conflicts of interests (COI) among early career researchers. The sample for this study included users of one or more of the 14 U.S. laboratories associated with the National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network. To be eligible, respondents must have been either still completing graduate work or <5 years since graduation. In total, 713 early career researchers completed the web survey, with about half still in graduate school. Results indicate that although respondents were aware of potential funding and COI influences on their work, they remained largely ignorant of their role in addressing or managing these issues. Respondents often attributed the responsibility of addressing these issues to their supervisors. Respondents who had received some training around these issues, however, were more likely to assume more personal responsibility. Overall, this study points out that ignorance among early career researchers is less about awareness of funding and COI issues and more about taking personal responsibility for addressing these issues.


Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality, and behavior. Milton-Keynes, England: Open University Press & Chicago, IL: Dorsey Press.
American Chemical Society. Author Guidelines. Retrieved from http://pubs.acs.org/paragonplus/submission/langd5/langd5_authguide.pdf.
American Institute of Physics. AIP Publishing LLC conflict of interest ethical guidelines for journals. Retrieved from http://publishing.aip.org/authors/conflict-of-interest.
American Physical Society. APS guidelines for professional conduct. Retrieved from https://www.aps.org/policy/statements/02_2.cfm.
American Physical Society. Conflict of interest. Education: Ethics case studies. Retrieved from http://www.aps.org/programs/education/ethics/interest/.
Ancker, J. S., & Flanagin, A. (2007). A comparison of conflict of interest policies at peer-reviewed journals in different scientific disciplines. Science and Engineering Ethics, 13, 147–157. doi:10.1007/s11948-007-9011-z.
Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Social cognitive determinants of blood donation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 1431–1457.
Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC). (2001). Protecting subjects, preserving trust, promoting progress: Policy and guidelines for the oversight of individual financial interests in human subjects research. Washington, DC. https://www.aamc.org/download/75302/data/firstreport.pdf
Beaudry, C., & Kanaian, R. (2013). Follow the (industry) money—The impact of science networks and industry-to-university contracts on academic patenting in nanotechnology and biotechnology. Industry and Innovation, 20(3), 241–260. doi:10.1080/13662716.2013.791125.
Berger, V. W. (2014). Conflicts of interest, selective inertia, and research malpractice in randomized clinical trials: An unholy trinity. Science and Engineering Ethics, 21(4), 857–874.
Besley, J. C. (2015). What do scientists think about the public and does it matter to their online engagement? Science and Public Policy, 42, 201–214.
Bird, S. J., & Spier, R. E. (2005). The complexity of competing and conflicting interests. Science and Engineering Ethics, 11, 515–517.
Cohen, J. J. (2001). Trust us to make a difference: Ensuring public confidence in the integrity of clinical research. Academic Medicine, 76, 209–214.
Dana, J., & Loewenstein, G. (2003). A social science perspective on gifts to physicians from industry. The Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA), 290(2), 252–255. doi:10.1001/jama.290.2.252.
Davis, M. (2001). Introduction. In M. Davis & A. Stark (Eds.), Conflict of interest in the professions (pp. 3–19). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
DeAngelis, C. D. (2000). Conflict of interest and the public trust. Journal of the American Medical Association, 284, 2237–2238.
Downs, A. (1966). Inside bureaucracy. Boston: Little, Brown.
Dunbar, W. S. (2005). Emotional Engagement in professional ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 11(4), 535–551.
Eosco, E., Tallapragada, M., McComas, K. A., & Brady, M. (2014). Exploring societal and ethical views of nanotechnology REUs. Nanoethics, 8(1), 91–99. doi:10.1007/s11569-014-0192-z.
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). They dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29, 109–123.
Fan, W., & Yan, Z. (2010). Factors affecting response rates in web surveys: A systematic review. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 132–139.
Fanelli, D. (2009). How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS One, 4(5), e5738. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005738.
Firestein, S. (2012). Ignorance: How it drives science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fishbein, M., & Yzer, M. C. (2003). Using theory to design effective health behavior interventions. Communication Theory, 13, 164–183.
Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1990). Uncertainty and Quality in Science for Policy. the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Gaudet, J. (2013). It takes two to tango: Knowledge mobilization and ignorance mobilization in science research and innovation. Prometheus: Critical Studies in Innovation, 31(3), 169–187. doi:10.1080/08109028.2013.847604.
Gross, M. (2012). Old science fiction, new inspiration: Communicating unknowns in the utilization of geothermal energy. Science Communication, 35(6), 810–818.
IC Insights. (2014). Top 10 semiconductor R&D leaders ranked for 2013. Retrieved from http://www.icinsights.com/news/bulletins/Top-10-Semiconductor-RD-Leaders-Ranked-For-2013-/.
Iyengar, S. (1996). Framing responsibility for political issues. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 546(1), 59–70.
Jensen, K. K., Forsberg, E.-M., Gamborg, C., Millar, K., & Sandøe, P. (2011). Facilitating ethical reflection among scientists using the ethical matrix. Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(3), 425–445.
Lesser, L. I., Ebbeling, C. B., Goozner, M., Wypij, D., & Ludwig, D. S. (2007). Relationship between funding source and conclusion among nutrition-related scientific articles. Plos Medicine, 4(1), 41–46.
Levine, J., Gussow, J. D., Hastings, D., & Eccher, A. (2003). Authors’ financial relationships with the food and beverage industry and their published positions on the fat substitute olestra. American Journal of Public Health, 93(4), 664–669.
Linnerooth, J. (1984). The political processing of uncertainty. Acta Psychologica, 56, 219–231.
Lipton, S., Boyd, E. A., & Bero, L. A. (2004). Conflicts of interest in academic research: Policies, processes, and attitudes. Accountability in Research, 11, 83–102. doi:10.1080/08989620490512214.
Longino, H. (1990). Science as social knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
McComas, K. A. (2008). Nutrition communication. The role of trust in health communication and the effect of conflicts of interest among scientists. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 67, 428–436.
McComas, K. A. (2012). Researcher views about funding sources and conflicts of interest in nanotechnology. Science and Engineering Ethics, 18(4), 699–717. doi:10.1007/s11948-011-9264-4.
McComas, K. A., & Simone, L. M. (2003). Media coverage of conflicts of interest in science. Science Communication, 24, 395–419. doi:10.1177/1075547003024004001.
Mecca, J. T., Gibson, C., Giorgini, V., Medeiros, K. E., Mumford, M. D., & Connelly, S. (2015). Researcher perspectives on conflicts of interest: A qualitative analysis of views from academia. Science and Engineering Ethics, 21, 843–855.
Michaels, D., & Monforton, C. (2005). Manufacturing uncertainty: Contested science and the protection of the public’s health and environment. American Journal of Public Health, 95(S1), S39–S48. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2004.043059.
Murray, F. (2004). The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: Sharing the laboratory life. Research Policy, 33(4), 643–659.
Nanowerk. (2014). An overview of journals publishing nanotechnology articles. News. Retrieved from http://www.nanowerk.com/nanotechnology-news/newsid=35778.php.
NNIN (2014). National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network. http://www.nnin.org/about-us.
NNI Budget. (2012). National Nanotechnology Initiative. Retrieved from http://www.nano.gov/node/748.
Nulty, D. D. (2008). The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: What can be done? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(3), 301–314.
O’Gorman, H. (1975). Pluralistic ignorance and white estimates of white support for racial segregation. Public Opinion Quarterly, 39(3), 313–330.
Olson, S. (1989). On being a scientist. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Proctor, R. N. (1995). Cancer wars: How Politics shapes what we know and don’t know about cancer. New York: Basic Books.
Ravetz, J. R. (1993). The Sin of science: Ignorance of ignorance. Science Communication, 15(2), 157–165. doi:10.1177/107554709301500203.
Roberts, J. (2013). Organizational ignorance: Towards a managerial perspective on the unknown. Management Learning, 44(3), 215–236.
Rothman, K. J. (1993). Conflict of interest: The new McCarthyism in science. Journal of the American Medical Association, 269, 2782–2784.
Schrag, B., Ferrell, G., Weil, V., & Fiedler, T. J. (2003). Barking up the wrong tree? Industry funding of academic research: A case study with commentaries. Science and Engineering Ethics, 9, 569–582.
Semiconductor Industry Association and Semiconductor Research Corporation. (2015). Nanotechnology-inspired grand challenges for the next decade. Retrieved from http://www.semiconductors.org/clientuploads/directory/DocumentSIA/Research%20and%20Technology/SIA%20and%20SRC%20Response%20to%20Grand%20Challenges%20RFI.pdf.
Smithson, M. (1993). Ignorance and science: Dilemmas, perspectives, and prospects. Science Communication, 15(2), 133–156. doi:10.1177/107554709301500202.
Spier, R. E. (2002). On dealing with bias. Science and Engineering Ethics, 8(4), 483–484.
Stocking, S. H. (1998). On drawing attention to ignorance. Science Communication, 20(1), 165–178. doi:10.1177/1075547098020001019.
Taylor, D. G. (1982). Pluralistic ignorance and spiral of silence: A formal analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 46, 311–335.
The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press (2009). Public praises science; scientists fault public, media: Scientific Achievements Less Prominent Than a Decade Ago. Report retrieved 14 January 2016 from http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-pdf/528.pdf.
Weiner, B. (2006). Social motivation, justice, and the moral emotions: an attributional approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Williams, H. C. (2013). Epidemiology of human atopic dermatitis—seven areas of notable progress and seven areas of notable ignorance. Veterinary Dermatology, 24(1), 3-e2.
Acknowledgments
This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under Grant No. ECS-0335765. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. The authors would also like to thank Rachel Brockhage and Dr. Christopher Clarke, who assisted with the research, and the reviewers for their insightful comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tallapragada, M., Eosco, G.M. & McComas, K.A. Aware, Yet Ignorant: Exploring the Views of Early Career Researchers About Funding and Conflicts of Interests in Science. Sci Eng Ethics 23, 147–164 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9764-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9764-3