• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

私人利益也很重要:对《科学、民主与研究权》的评论

Private interests count too: commentary on "Science, democracy, and the right to research".

作者信息

Frankel Mark S

机构信息

Scientific Freedom, Responsibility and Law Program, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, DC 20005, USA.

出版信息

Sci Eng Ethics. 2009 Sep;15(3):367-73. doi: 10.1007/s11948-009-9137-2. Epub 2009 May 16.

DOI:10.1007/s11948-009-9137-2
PMID:19449130
Abstract

Along with concerns about the deleterious effects of politically driven government intervention on science are the intrusion of private sector interests into the conduct of research and the reporting of its results. Scientists are generally unprepared for the challenges posed by private interests seeking to advance their economic, political, or ideological agendas. They must educate and prepare themselves for assaults on scientific freedom, not because it is a legal right, but rather because social progress depends on it.

摘要

除了担心政治驱动的政府干预对科学产生有害影响之外,还有私营部门利益对研究行为及其结果报告的侵入。科学家们通常对私营利益方为推进其经济、政治或意识形态议程而带来的挑战毫无准备。他们必须为捍卫科学自由所遭受的攻击进行自我教育并做好准备,这并非因为科学自由是一项法定权利,而是因为社会进步依赖于此。

相似文献

1
Private interests count too: commentary on "Science, democracy, and the right to research".私人利益也很重要:对《科学、民主与研究权》的评论
Sci Eng Ethics. 2009 Sep;15(3):367-73. doi: 10.1007/s11948-009-9137-2. Epub 2009 May 16.
2
Science, democracy, and the right to research.科学、民主与研究权。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2009 Sep;15(3):351-66. doi: 10.1007/s11948-009-9135-4. Epub 2009 May 12.
3
Scientific dissent and public policy. Is targeting dissent a reasonable way to protect sound policy decisions?科学异议与公共政策。将异议作为目标是保护合理政策决策的合理方式吗?
EMBO Rep. 2013 Mar 1;14(3):231-5. doi: 10.1038/embor.2013.8. Epub 2012 Feb 8.
4
A house divided.
Washington Post. 1997 Oct 12:12-17, 24-29.
5
Scientists, bioethics and democracy: the Italian case and its meanings.科学家、生物伦理与民主:意大利案例及其意义。
J Med Ethics. 2007 Jun;33(6):349-52. doi: 10.1136/jme.2007.020586.
6
The influence of liberal political ideology on nursing science.自由政治意识形态对护理科学的影响。
Nurs Inq. 2001 Jun;8(2):118-29. doi: 10.1046/j.1440-1800.2001.00095.x.
7
Science and socially responsible freedom: commentary on "Cognitive enhancement: methods, ethics, regulatory challenges".科学与对社会负责的自由:评《认知增强:方法、伦理、监管挑战》
Sci Eng Ethics. 2009 Sep;15(3):343-9. doi: 10.1007/s11948-009-9132-7. Epub 2009 Apr 28.
8
Public reason and political conflict: abortion and homosexuality.公共理性与政治冲突:堕胎与同性恋
Yale Law J. 1997 Jun;106(8):2475-504.
9
APA position statement on abortion.美国心理学会关于堕胎的立场声明。
Am J Psychiatry. 1993 Apr;150(4):676; author reply 677.
10
Regulating scientific research: should scientists be left alone?规范科学研究:科学家应该被放任不管吗?
FASEB J. 2008 Mar;22(3):654-8. doi: 10.1096/fj.07-9077LSF. Epub 2007 Oct 10.

引用本文的文献

1
Editors' overview: forbidding science?编辑概述:禁止科学?
Sci Eng Ethics. 2009 Sep;15(3):263-9. doi: 10.1007/s11948-009-9146-1. Epub 2009 Jun 27.

本文引用的文献

1
Science, democracy, and the right to research.科学、民主与研究权。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2009 Sep;15(3):351-66. doi: 10.1007/s11948-009-9135-4. Epub 2009 May 12.
2
Peer review in the balance.同行评议面临权衡。
N Engl J Med. 2008 May 22;358(21):2276-7. doi: 10.1056/NEJMe0803516.
3
Peer review. Pfizer denied access to journals' files.同行评审。辉瑞公司被拒绝查阅期刊档案。
Science. 2008 Mar 21;319(5870):1601. doi: 10.1126/science.319.5870.1601a.
4
US legal principles and confidentiality of the peer review process.美国法律原则与同行评审过程的保密性。
JAMA. 2002 Jun 5;287(21):2839-41. doi: 10.1001/jama.287.21.2839.
5
Concerns about science and attempts to regulate inquiry.
Daedalus. 1978 Spring;107(2):1-21.
6
Comment: Gunsmoke--changing public attitudes toward smoking and firearms.评论:《枪战英豪》——改变公众对吸烟和枪支的态度。
Am J Public Health. 1997 Jun;87(6):910-3. doi: 10.2105/ajph.87.6.910.