ABSTRACT
The report of the American Psychological Association (APA) Task Force on Human Rights proposes a definition of human rights in relation to psychology; reviews the relationship between human rights and the concepts that have historically guided APA (e.g., human welfare, public interest, and social justice); proposes an analytical Five Connections framework that defines the connections between psychology and human rights and uses that framework to review APA's recent and ongoing human rights activities; and makes recommendations for organizational mechanisms that can ensure APA's ongoing and visible commitment to human rights. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
Subject(s)
Human Rights , Societies, Scientific , Humans , Psychology , Social JusticeABSTRACT
A Scientific Integrity Consortium developed a set of recommended principles and best practices that can be used broadly across scientific disciplines as a mechanism for consensus on scientific integrity standards and to better equip scientists to operate in a rapidly changing research environment. The two principles that represent the umbrella under which scientific processes should operate are as follows: (1) Foster a culture of integrity in the scientific process. (2) Evidence-based policy interests may have legitimate roles to play in influencing aspects of the research process, but those roles should not interfere with scientific integrity. The nine best practices for instilling scientific integrity in the implementation of these two overarching principles are (1) Require universal training in robust scientific methods, in the use of appropriate experimental design and statistics, and in responsible research practices for scientists at all levels, with the training content regularly updated and presented by qualified scientists. (2) Strengthen scientific integrity oversight and processes throughout the research continuum with a focus on training in ethics and conduct. (3) Encourage reproducibility of research through transparency. (4) Strive to establish open science as the standard operating procedure throughout the scientific enterprise. (5) Develop and implement educational tools to teach communication skills that uphold scientific integrity. (6) Strive to identify ways to further strengthen the peer review process. (7) Encourage scientific journals to publish unanticipated findings that meet standards of quality and scientific integrity. (8) Seek harmonization and implementation among journals of rapid, consistent, and transparent processes for correction and/or retraction of published papers. (9) Design rigorous and comprehensive evaluation criteria that recognize and reward the highest standards of integrity in scientific research.
Subject(s)
Biomedical Research/ethics , Consensus , Engineering/ethics , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Publishing/ethics , Science/ethics , Scientific Misconduct , Access to Information , Culture , Education, Professional , Ethics, Research , Humans , Peer Review , Policy , Reproducibility of Results , ResearchABSTRACT
A human-rights-based analysis can be a useful tool for the scientific community and policy makers as they develop codes of conduct, harmonized standards, and national policies for data sharing. The human rights framework provides a shared set of values and norms across borders, defines rights and responsibilities of various actors involved in data sharing, addresses the potential harms as well as the benefits of data sharing, and offers a framework for balancing competing values. The right to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its applications offers a particularly helpful lens through which to view data as both a tool of scientific inquiry to which access is vital and as a product of science from which everyone should benefit.