ReviewBioscience2026
The epistemic importance of ethical neutrality in science.
Review in Bioscience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent political initiatives calling for greater "viewpoint diversity" among scientists underscore the importance of ethical neutrality in the internal workings of science. In contrast, some proponents of the Values in Science movement argue that scientists should employ the morally correct values in conducting their research and when evaluating peers. This has given rise to a new demarcation problem: an attempt to identify, on principled grounds, which ethical and political values should/should not influence scientific research. We argue that only epistemic values, such as those outlined by sociologist Robert Merton, should influence the internal workings of science. Ethical and political disagreements among scientists are bound to emerge, especially over the long run. If researchers were to accommodate shifting ethical and political landscapes in their work, it would erode trust among scientists who must build upon each other's findings, while corrupting more formalized policy-making procedures already designed to integrate neutral scientific findings with non-epistemic values.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.