Responding to Richard: Celebrity and (mis)representation of science.

Drawing on 48 in-depth interviews conducted with biologists and physicists at universities in the United Kingdom, this study examines scientists' perceptions of the role celebrity scientists play in socially contentious public debates. We examine Richard Dawkins' involvement in public debates related to the relationship between science and religion as a case to analyze scientists' perceptions of the role celebrity scientists play in the public sphere and the implications of celebrity science for the practice of science communication. Findings show that Dawkins' proponents view the celebrity scientist as a provocateur who asserts the cultural authority of science in the public sphere. Critics, who include both religious and nonreligious scientists, argue that Dawkins misrepresents science and scientists and reject his approach to public engagement. Scientists emphasize promotion of science over the scientist, diplomacy over derision, and dialogue over ideological extremism.

Scientists and religious leaders compete for cultural authority of science.

Measurement of public trust in sources of information about science primarily examines whether the public turns to the "science communication industry" for information about science. Research posits, however, that scientists are not the singular cultural authority on science. Here, we examine the extent to which people turn to religion and religious individuals for information about science. Drawing on a nationally representative survey of US adults, we examine what factors-when individuals have a question about science-shape respondent's likelihood of turning to science-based versus religion-based sources. Results show that religiosity is a strong positive predictor of looking to religious sources for scientific information, but it does not deter seeking out scientific sources. The results also show that interest in science has a positive influence on the likelihood of turning to a religious source.

The influence of science popularizers on the public's view of religion and science: An experimental assessment.

Research suggests that public figures can play an influential role in forming public opinion; yet, little research has experimentally tested the efficacy of public figures on the cognitive formation of boundaries. Using an experiment embedded within a nationally representative survey, we examine how two science popularizers, Francis Collins and Richard Dawkins, influence perceptions regarding the boundaries between religion and science. We find that learning of Dawkins does not influence people's perceptions of the religion-science relationship, while learning of Collins shifts respondents toward a collaborative view of religion and science. Findings suggest that figures with unexpected views might be more effective in changing conceptual boundaries.

A Gendered Approach to Science Ethics for US and UK Physicists.

Some research indicates that women professionals-when compared to men-may be more ethical in the workplace. Existing literature that discusses gender and ethics is confined to the for-profit business sector and primarily to a US context. In particular, there is little attention paid to gender and ethics in science professions in a global context. This represents a significant gap, as science is a rapidly growing and global professional sector, as well as one with ethically ambiguous areas. Adopting an international comparative perspective, this paper relies on 121 semi-structured interviews with US and UK academic physicists to examine how physicists perceive the impact of gender on science ethics. Findings indicate that some US and UK physicists believe that female scientists handle ethical issues within science in a feminine way whereas their male colleagues approach ethics in a masculine way. Some of these physicists further claim that these different approaches to science ethics lead to male and female scientists' different levels of competitiveness in academic physics. In both the US and the UK, there are "gender-blind" physicists, who do not think gender is related to professional ethics. Relying on physicists' nuanced descriptions this paper contributes to the current understanding of gender and science and engineering ethics.

Ethical Ambiguity in Science.

Drawing on 171 in-depth interviews with physicists at universities in the United States and the UK, this study examines the narratives of 48 physicists to explain the concept of ethical ambiguity: the border where legitimate and illegitimate conduct is blurred. Researchers generally assume that scientists agree on what constitutes both egregious and more routine forms of misconduct in science. The results of this study show that scientists perceive many scenarios as ethically gray, rather than black and white. Three orientations to ethical ambiguity are considered-altruism, inconsequential outcomes, and preserving the status quo-that allow possibly questionable behavior to persist unchallenged. Each discursive strategy is rationalized as promoting the collective interest of science rather than addressing what is ethically correct or incorrect. The results of this study suggest that ethics training in science should focus not only on fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism and more routine forms of misconduct, but also on strategies for resolving ethically ambiguous scenarios where appropriate action may not be clear.

Male Scientists' Competing Devotions to Work and Family: Changing Norms in a Male-Dominated Profession.

Using in-depth interviews with 74 men across different ranks in biology and physics at prestigious US universities, we ask to what extent changing norms of fatherhood and a flexible workplace affect men working in a highly male-dominated profession and what variation exists in family forms. We conceptualize four typologies of men: those forgoing children, egalitarian partners, neo-traditional dual-earners, and traditional breadwinners. Findings suggest male scientists hold strong work devotions yet a growing number seek egalitarian relationships, which they frame as reducing their devotion to work. The majority of men find the all-consuming nature of academic science conflicts with changing fatherhood norms.

How academic biologists and physicists view science outreach.

Scholars and pundits alike argue that U.S. scientists could do more to reach out to the general public. Yet, to date, there have been few systematic studies that examine how scientists understand the barriers that impede such outreach. Through analysis of 97 semi-structured interviews with academic biologists and physicists at top research universities in the United States, we classify the type and target audiences of scientists' outreach activities. Finally, we explore the narratives academic scientists have about outreach and its reception in the academy, in particular what they perceive as impediments to these activities. We find that scientists' outreach activities are stratified by gender and that university and disciplinary rewards as well as scientists' perceptions of their own skills have an impact on science outreach. Research contributions and recommendations for university policy follow.

Scientists want more children.

Scholars partly attribute the low number of women in academic science to the impact of the science career on family life. Yet, the picture of how men and women in science--at different points in the career trajectory--compare in their perceptions of this impact is incomplete. In particular, we know little about the perceptions and experiences of junior and senior scientists at top universities, institutions that have a disproportionate influence on science, science policy, and the next generation of scientists. Here we show that having fewer children than wished as a result of the science career affects the life satisfaction of science faculty and indirectly affects career satisfaction, and that young scientists (graduate students and postdoctoral fellows) who have had fewer children than wished are more likely to plan to exit science entirely. We also show that the impact of science on family life is not just a woman's problem; the effect on life satisfaction of having fewer children than desired is more pronounced for male than female faculty, with life satisfaction strongly related to career satisfaction. And, in contrast to other research, gender differences among graduate students and postdoctoral fellows disappear. Family factors impede talented young scientists of both sexes from persisting to research positions in academic science. In an era when the global competitiveness of US science is at risk, it is concerning that a significant proportion of men and women trained in the select few spots available at top US research universities are considering leaving science and that such desires to leave are related to the impact of the science career on family life. Results from our study may inform university family leave policies for science departments as well as mentoring programs in the sciences.

International stem cell collaboration: how disparate policies between the United States and the United Kingdom impact research.

As the scientific community globalizes, it is increasingly important to understand the effects of international collaboration on the quality and quantity of research produced. While it is generally assumed that international collaboration enhances the quality of research, this phenomenon is not well examined. Stem cell research is unique in that it is both politically charged and a research area that often generates international collaborations, making it an ideal case through which to examine international collaborations. Furthermore, with promising medical applications, the research area is dynamic and responsive to a globalizing science environment. Thus, studying international collaborations in stem cell research elucidates the role of existing international networks in promoting quality research, as well as the effects that disparate national policies might have on research. This study examined the impact of collaboration on publication significance in the United States and the United Kingdom, world leaders in stem cell research with disparate policies. We reviewed publications by US and UK authors from 2008, along with their citation rates and the political factors that may have contributed to the number of international collaborations. The data demonstrated that international collaborations significantly increased an article's impact for UK and US investigators. While this applied to UK authors whether they were corresponding or secondary, this effect was most significant for US authors who were corresponding authors. While the UK exhibited a higher proportion of international publications than the US, this difference was consistent with overall trends in international scientific collaboration. The findings suggested that national stem cell policy differences and regulatory mechanisms driving international stem cell research in the US and UK did not affect the frequency of international collaborations, or even the countries with which the US and UK most often collaborated. Geographical and traditional collaborative relationships were the predominate considerations in establishing international collaborations.

Prayers in the clinic: how pediatric physicians respond.

BACKGROUND: Physicians and researchers have recently paid increased attention to prayer in physician-patient interactions. Research focuses more on attitudinal questions about whether physicians and/or patients think prayer is relevant than on actual data about when and how prayer comes up in the clinic and how physicians respond. We focus on pediatric physicians to investigate: 1) how prayer enters clinical contexts and 2) how physicians respond. METHODS: We examined in-depth interviews with 30 academic pediatricians and pediatric oncologists. All of these physicians were employed by the most highly ranked hospitals according to US News and World Report. RESULTS: In close to 100% of cases when the subject of prayer came up in clinical contexts, it was patients and families who raised it. Patients and families mostly talked about prayer in response to a seriously ill or dying child. When it was raised, pediatric physicians responded to prayer by participating; accommodating but not participating; reframing; and directing families to other resources. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians wanted to respect patients and families around the topic of prayer. They negotiated between patient/family requests, the specific situation, and their own comfort levels to respond in one of four ways. Their four responses allowed researchers to generate hypotheses about the independent variables that influence how pediatric physicians respond to prayer. Asking how prayer actually came up in clinical situations rather than how patients and/or physicians thought it should be raised, better informs ongoing conversations about the significance of prayer in physician-patient interactions.

The spiritual and religious identities, beliefs, and practices of academic pediatricians in the United States.

PURPOSE: Physicians' spiritual and religious identities, beliefs, and practices are beginning to be explored. The objective of this study was to gather descriptive information about personal religion and spirituality from a random sample of academic American pediatricians and to compare this information with similar data from the public. METHOD: In 2005, a Web-based survey of a random sample of 208 pediatrician faculty from 13 academic centers ranked by the US News & World Report as "honor roll" hospitals was conducted. Surveys elicited information about personal beliefs and practices as well as their influence on decisions about patient care and clinical practice. Multiple questions were replicated from the General Social Survey to enable comparisons with the public. Descriptive statistics were generated, and logistic regression analyses were conducted on relevant variables. RESULTS: Nearly 88% of respondents were raised in a religious tradition, but just 67.2% claimed current religious identification. More than half (52.6%) reported praying privately; additional spiritual practices reported included relaxation techniques (38.8%), meditation (29.3%), sacred readings (26.7%), and yoga (19%). The majority of academic pediatricians (58.6%) believed that personal spiritual or religious beliefs influenced their interactions with patients/colleagues. These odds increased 5.1-fold when academic pediatricians attended religious services monthly or more (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the American public, a notably smaller proportion of academic pediatricians reported a personal religious identity. The majority believed spiritual and religious beliefs influenced their practice of pediatrics. Whether secular or faith-based belief systems measurably modify academic pediatric practice is unknown.

The religious and spiritual beliefs and practices of academic pediatric oncologists in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: Religion and spirituality are increasingly recognized as important in the care of seriously ill patients. This study evaluates religious and spiritual beliefs and practices among pediatric oncology faculty and compares their religiosity and spirituality to the general public. METHODS: Information was gathered from a sampling frame of all pediatric oncology faculty working in 13 US News and World Report's "honor role" hospitals. These data were compared with the general public (using the General Social Survey), through frequency distributions, descriptive crosstabs, and tests of significance, including chi(2) statistics. RESULTS: Eighty-five percent of pediatric oncology faculty described themselves as spiritual. In all, 24.3% reported attending religious services 2 to 3 times a month or more in the past year. Twenty-seven percent of pediatric oncologists believed in God with no doubts. In all, 52.7% believed their spiritual or religious beliefs influence interactions with patients and colleagues. Among the general public 40.1% reported attending religious services 2 to 3 times a month or more in the past year (P<0.01) and 60.4% believed in God with no doubts (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although many have no traditional religious identity, large fractions of pediatric oncology faculty described themselves as spiritual. This may have implications for the education of pediatric oncologists and the spiritual care of seriously ill children and their families.