Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38026042›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2023

Beyond kindness: a proposal for the flourishing of science and scientists alike.

Frank Schumann, Mareike Smolka, Zoltan Dienes, Annika Lübbert, Wolfgang Lukas, Mary Gehring Rees, Enrico Fucci, Marieke van Vugt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Frank SchumannLaboratoire des systèmes perceptifs, Département d'études cognitives, École normale supérieure, PSL University, CNRS, 75005 Paris, France.
Mareike SmolkaKnowledge, Technology and Innovation, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Zoltan DienesSchool of Psychology, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7454-3161
Annika LübbertIndependent Researcher, Hamburg, Germany.
Wolfgang LukasInstitute for Globally Distributed Open Research and Education (IGDORE), Graz, Austria.
Mary Gehring ReesIndependent Researcher, Houston, TX, USA.
Enrico FucciInstitute for Globally Distributed Open Research and Education (IGDORE), Gothenburg, Sweden.
Marieke van VugtBernoulli Institute of Mathematics, Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3200-0059

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We argue that many of the crises currently afflicting science can be associated with a present failure of science to sufficiently embody its own values. Here, we propose a response beyond mere crisis resolution based on the observation that an ethical framework of flourishing derived from the Buddhist tradition aligns surprisingly well with the values of science itself. This alignment, we argue, suggests a recasting of science from a competitively managed activity of knowledge production to a collaboratively organized moral practice that puts kindness and sharing at its core. We end by examining how Flourishing Science could be embodied in academic practice, from individual to organizational levels, and how that could help to arrive at a flourishing of scientists and science alike.

Indexed as

ethicsflourishingopen sciencescience policy

Identifiers

PMID38026042
PMCPMC10663797

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.