Besley John C, McCright Aaron M, Zahry Nagwan R, Elliott Kevin C, Kaminski Norbert E, Martin Joseph D
College of Communication Arts and Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, United States of America.
Lyman Briggs College, Department of Sociology, Environmental Science and Policy Program, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2017 Apr 20;12(4):e0175643. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175643. eCollection 2017.
University scientists conducting research on topics of potential health concern often want to partner with a range of actors, including government entities, non-governmental organizations, and private enterprises. Such partnerships can provide access to needed resources, including funding. However, those who observe the results of such partnerships may judge those results based on who is involved. This set of studies seeks to assess how people perceive two hypothetical health science research collaborations. In doing so, it also tests the utility of using procedural justice concepts to assess perceptions of research legitimacy as a theoretical way to investigate conflict of interest perceptions. Findings show that including an industry collaborator has clear negative repercussions for how people see a research partnership and that these perceptions shape people's willingness to see the research as a legitimate source of knowledge. Additional research aimed at further communicating procedures that might mitigate the impact of industry collaboration is suggested.
从事潜在健康问题研究的大学科学家通常希望与一系列行为主体合作,包括政府实体、非政府组织和私营企业。这种合作关系可以提供获得所需资源的途径,包括资金。然而,观察此类合作关系结果的人可能会根据参与方来评判这些结果。这组研究旨在评估人们如何看待两个假设的健康科学研究合作项目。在此过程中,它还测试了使用程序正义概念来评估研究合法性认知作为一种调查利益冲突认知的理论方法的效用。研究结果表明,纳入行业合作伙伴对人们如何看待研究合作关系有明显的负面影响,而且这些认知会影响人们将该研究视为合法知识来源的意愿。建议开展进一步的研究,以更好地传达可能减轻行业合作影响的程序。