Declarations, accusations and judgement: examining conflict of interest discourses as performative speech-acts.
Concerns over conflicts of interest (COI) in academic research and medical practice continue to provoke a great deal of discussion. What is most obvious in this discourse is that when COIs are declared, or perceived to exist in others, there is a focus on both the descriptive question of whether there is a COI and, subsequently, the normative question of whether it is good, bad or neutral. We contend, however, that in addition to the descriptive and normative, COI declarations and accusations can be understood as performatives. In this article, we apply J.L. Austin's performative speech-act theory to COI discourses and illustrate how this works using a contemporary case study of COI in biomedical publishing. We argue that using Austin's theory of performative speech-acts serves to highlight the social arrangements and role of authorities in COI discourse and so provides a rich framework to examine declarations, accusations and judgements of COI that often arise in the context of biomedical research and practice.
Centre for Values, Ethics and the Law in Medicine, Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Level 1, Medical Foundation Building, K25, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia. christopher.mayes@sydney.edu.au.
Christopher
C
Mayes
Centre for Values, Ethics and the Law in Medicine, Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Level 1, Medical Foundation Building, K25, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Wendy
W
Lipworth
Centre for Values, Ethics and the Law in Medicine, Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Level 1, Medical Foundation Building, K25, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Ian
I
Kerridge
D016265:Conflict of Interest; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D032984:Ethics, Research; D006801:Humans; D007600:Judgment; D013060:Speech
Conflicts of interest; Discourse analysis; J.L. Austin; Research ethics