Intellectual freedom and editorial responsibilities within the context of controversial research.
The primary purpose of this article is to explore the limits that an agent, such as the government or the American Psychological Association, may place on one's right to pursue a program of research or to share the findings of a research project. The primary argument that evolves here is that researchers' rights to pursue an interesting hypothesis, and their freedom of expression, are conditional. The author examines the potential pragmatic and epistemological barriers to a program of research and the responsibilities that researchers bear to address epistemological and nonepistemological matters while reviewing the implications of their work.
Pittenger
David J
DJ
Department of Psychology, The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, 615 McCallie Ave., Chattanooga, TN 37403, USA. david-pittenger@utc.edu
D035841:Behavioral Research / Q000941:ethics*; D035081:Editorial Policies; D036262:Empirical Research; D026689:Ethical Analysis; D028744:Ethics Committees, Research; D004995:Ethics, Professional; D032984:Ethics, Research; D005610:Freedom; D036281:Genetic Research; D005824:Genetics, Behavioral; D006805:Human Experimentation; D006801:Humans; D007360:Intelligence; D019359:Knowledge; D016134:Organizational Policy; D010378:Pedophilia; D011057:Politics; D011584:Psychology; D011640:Public Policy; D012108:Research Personnel; D012109:Research Support as Topic; D018570:Risk Assessment; D012586:Science / Q000941:ethics*; D012926:Social Control, Formal; D012940:Social Problems; D012941:Social Responsibility; D012952:Societies