Article Text
Abstract
Ploug and Holm argue that polarisation in scientific communities can generate conflicts of interest for individual researchers. Their proposed solution to this problem is that authors should self-report whether they are polarised on conflict of interest disclosure forms. I argue that this is unlikely to work. This is because any author with the self-awareness and integrity to identify herself as polarised would be unlikely to conduct polarised research to begin with. Instead, I suggest that it is the role of (associate-level) editors of journals to detect and report on polarisation. One consequence of this view is that they need to be sufficiently familiar with the field of research they are evaluating to know whether polarisation is at stake.
- Applied and Professional Ethics
- Ethics
- Scientific Research
- Public Health Ethics
- Publication Ethics
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Linked Articles
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Accessibility and transparency of editor conflicts of interest policy instruments in medical journals
- Conflict of interest disclosure and the polarisation of scientific communities
- Conflict of interest policies and disclosure requirements among European Society of Cardiology national cardiovascular journals
- Mandatory disclosure of financial interests of journals and editors
- Journal editors’ perspectives on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in biomedical journals: a qualitative study
- Improving researchers’ conflict of interest declarations
- Ten years later: a review of the US 2009 institute of medicine report on conflicts of interest and solutions for further reform
- Effect of revealing authors’ conflicts of interests in peer review: randomized controlled trial
- Disclosures of funding sources and conflicts of interest in published HIV/AIDS research conducted in developing countries
- Conflicts of interest in clinical ethics consults