Rice study: Chinese scientists prioritize government service more than global peers
In a new study of physicists from the U.S., U.K. and China, Rice University and Santa Clara University researchers found that Chinese scientists feel a greater obligation to serve their government with research efforts than international counterparts.
“Cross‑National Variations in Scientific Ethics: Exploring Ethical Perspectives Among Scientists in China, the U.S. and the U.K.” reveals significant differences in how physicists view their responsibilities as scientists. The research included interviews with 211 physicists and sheds light on how scientists in these three countries approach ethical issues like mentorship, research integrity and public engagement. The research was authored by Elaine Howard Ecklund, the Herbert S. Autrey Chair and Professor of Sociology and director of the Boniuk Institute, and Di Di, an assistant professor of sociology at Santa Clara.
One of the key findings revealed that physicists who rely on public funding, especially in the U.S. and U.K., feel a strong responsibility to communicate their research in a clear and accessible way. In China, scientists often feel more obligated to serve both the government and society at large than their global counterparts.
Di said that Chinese scientists acknowledge the development of science and technology often involves a degree of conservatism, encouraging scientists to prioritize service to their country and government.
“At the same time, they recognize the importance of using scientific research to benefit humanity as a whole,” Di said. “When considering their social responsibilities, the Chinese scientists work to navigate this tension within the framework of scientific ethics.”
The research also revealed that U.S. and U.K. scientists generally have fewer issues navigating global ethics standards, including when it comes to verifying and publishing results, but their Chinese counterparts often struggle to reconcile their national responsibilities to honor the government with international expectations about research collaboration.
“Scientists in each of the nations felt that publishing results quickly is sometimes at odds with fully verifying results of studies,” said Ecklund, the principal investigator for the project.
Despite the strong support among scientists from the three different countries, some scientists admitted there are competitive pressures. A U.K. physicist said that being truthful in conducting research means not making claims “that you haven’t verified fully” and waiting “until you are sure of your results before publishing,” but he added that this is easier said than done.
“This is an issue in a very competitive environment where people will get something fairly minor and then oversell it, particularly [to] funding agencies,” the survey respondent said. It is, he believes, inevitable that some scientists will use “buzz words” to exaggerate their results, which he said “in some instances [can] sail close to deceitfulness.”
The study also looked at how researchers balanced mentorship and teaching.
“Mentorship and teaching are seen as crucial roles, particularly in countries with fewer resources, to help develop the next generation of scientists,” said Di, the study’s lead author. However, the study revealed Chinese scientists had mixed feelings about taking a more egalitarian relationship with students.
“I don’t think that students and teachers are equal. Teachers are there to teach students, not to listen to whatever demands students have. I oppose the way it is developing in the U.S. — to assess the teacher’s performance entirely based on the students’ evaluation,” the survey respondent said.
The researchers emphasize the need for ethical guidelines that take into account the different cultural and national perspectives of scientists. The study advocates for including voices from countries with developing scientific infrastructures to ensure that ethical standards are relevant and fair globally.
“Our findings show the importance of considering cultural and national differences when creating ethical standards for science,” Ecklund said. “By doing this, we can build a more inclusive and responsible scientific community.”
The study is online at https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11948-024-00505-0.
Research for this study was supported by the National Science Foundation, “Ethics among Scientists in International Contexts,” Ecklund, PI.
Journal
Science and Engineering Ethics
Method of Research
Survey
Subject of Research
People
Article Title
Cross-National Variations in Scientific Ethics: Exploring Ethical Perspectives Among Scientists in China, the US, and the UK
No comments:
Post a Comment