Work Setting, Publication, and Scientific Responsibility more

Semi-structured interviews (n=61) with toxic-exposure epidemiologists indicate that those in government settings (CDC, state health departments, and NIH) were more aware of and responsive to societal consequences of their publications than were those in universities. The NIH data were surprising, given NIH’s ivory tower image, but in part appear to stem from a broad trend towards greater accountability in science. Other worksite influences included: "institutional voice": epidemiologists from NIH or CDC were aware of speaking in the "voice of the government". There was also limited evidence suggesting the importance of local unit environment: investigators in the same research unit often reported being influenced by the tone set by the unit chief and colleagues. This preliminary study suggests that work-setting influences how epidemiologists define and execute their ethical responsibilities towards social consequences of their work, and generates questions and five testable hypotheses for future empirical research.
KEYWORDS: Toxic-exposure epidemiology; Work-setting; Scientific responsibility; Scientific publication; Media.