Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Empirical Philosophy of Science pp 127–143Cite as

Longino’s Theory of Objectivity and Commercialized Research

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics ((SAPERE,volume 21))

Abstract

In this paper, I shall examine Helen Longino’s view on the objectivity of science and study how it can be applied to the evaluation of current scientific practices. By discussing two prominent cases in biomedical research, I articulate some epistemically alarming features of commercialized research and highlight the importance of paying attention to the context of scientific inquiry. In addition, I claim that the examined cases can help uncover philosophically interesting empirical work on extra-scientific mechanisms influencing research practices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    With the commercialization of research I refer to the same phenomenon as Irzik (2010, 130): when research is commercialized, “…scientific research is done, scientific knowledge is produced, and scientific expertise mobilized…primarily for the purpose of profit”.

  2. 2.

    In 1995 Longino questions her original distinction between constitutive and contextual values and argues that what we treat as paradigmatic constitutive values is partly dependent on our contextual values.

  3. 3.

    E.g., Shapin (2008) states that the commercialization of research may in some cases increase the freedom of researchers.

  4. 4.

    I am not going to discuss the adequacy or exhaustiveness of this definition here.

  5. 5.

    I do not claim that financial interests determine the outcomes of studies. However, as I shall state below, there is statistical evidence on the steering effect the source of funding has on research outcomes. In nutrition research (Lesser et al. 2007), research on tobacco smoking (Bero 2005), and medical research (Lundh et al. 2012), for example, there seems to exist a link between the source of funding and the outcomes of studies. Thus, it is pertinent to examine this issue further.

  6. 6.

    The official black box warning announcing that SSRIs may cause suicidality was attached to packages no earlier than in 2004.

  7. 7.

    The discussion of the role of RCTs and how they ought to be monitored is connected to the debate over FDA’s relationship with the pharmaceutical industry and how the system through which drugs are approved has motivated the industry to adopt dubious lines of conduct. Because of the lack of space, this matter cannot be examined here. These questions have been discussed, e.g., by Biddle (2007) and Healy (2012).

  8. 8.

    Information on the industry articles had become available through legal action.

References

  • Babcock, L., Loewenstein, G., Isscharoff, S., Camerer, C.: Biased judgment of fairness in bargaining. Am. Econ. Rev. 85(5), 1337–1343 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  • Barwell, I.: Towards a defense of objectivity. In: Lennin, K., Whitford, M. (eds.) Knowing the Difference. Feminist Perspectives in Epistemology, pp. 79–94. Routledge, London (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bekelman, J., Li, J., Gross, C.: Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research. JAMA 289(4), 454–465 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bero, L.: Tobacco industry manipulation of research. Public Health Chronicles. 120(2), 202–208 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  • Biddle, J.: Lessons from the Vioxx debacle: what the privatization of science can teach us about social epistemology. Soc. Epistemol. 21(1), 21–39 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J.R.: One-Shot Science. In: Radder, H. (ed.) The Commercialization of Academic Research. Science and the Modern University, pp. 90–109. Pittsburgh University Press, Pittsburgh (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrier, M.: Research under pressure. Methodological features of commercialized science. In: Radder, H. (ed.) The Commodification of Academic Science. Science and the Modern University, pp. 158–186. Pittsburgh University Press, Pittsburgh (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorsey, E.R., Thompson, J.P., Carrasco, M., de Roulet, J., Vitticore, P., et al.: Financing of U.S biomedical research and new drug approvals across therapeutic areas. PLoS ONE 4(9), e7015 (2009). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0007015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fergusson, D., Doucette, S., Cranley, Glass, K., Shapiro, S., Healy, D., Hebert, P., Hutton, B.: Association between suicide attempts and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: systematic review of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 330, 396–402 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Healy, D.: Conflicting interests in Toronto. Anatomy of a controversy at the interface of academia and industry. Perspect. Biol. Med. 45(2), 250–263 (2002a)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Healy, D.: In the grip of the python: conflicts at the university-industry interface. Sci. Eng. Ethics 9, 59–71 (2002b)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Healy, D.: The antidepressant tale: figures signifying nothing. Adv. Psychiatr. Treat. 12, 320–328 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Healy, D.: Science, rhetoric and the causality of adverse events. Int. J. Risk Saf. Med. 24, 1–14 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  • Healy, D.: Pharmageddon. University of California Press, Berkeley (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  • Healy, D., Cattell, D.: Interface between authorship, industry and science in the domain of therapeutics. Br. J. Psychiatry 183, 22–27 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Healy, D., Whitaker, C.: Antidepressants and suicide: risk-benefit conundrums. J. Psychiatry Neurosci. 28, 331–337 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  • Irzik, G.: Commercialization of science in a neoliberal world. In: Bugra, A., Agartan, K. (eds.) Reading Polanyi for the 21st Century: Market Economy as a Political Project, pp. 135–153. Palgrave Macmillan, New York (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  • Irzik, G.: Why should philosophers of science pay attention to commercialization of academic science? In: Suárez, M., Dorato, M., Rédei, M. (eds.) EPSA Epistemology and Methodology of Science: Launch of the European Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 129–138 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  • Jukola, S.: The commercialization of research and the quest for the objectivity of science. Found. Sci. (2014). doi:10.1007/s10699-014-9377-9

  • Katz, D., Caplan, A., Merz, J.: All gifts large and small: toward an understanding of the ethics of pharmaceutical industry gift-giving. Am. J. Bioeth. 3(3), 39–46 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitcher, P.: Truth, and Democracy. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2001)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kitcher, P.: Science in a Democratic Society. Prometheus Books, New York (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  • Krimsky, S.: Science in the Private Interest. Has the Lure of Profits Corrupted Biomedical Research? Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc., Lanham (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamont, M.: How Professors Think? Inside the Curious World of Academic Judgment. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lesser, L., Ebbeling, C., Goozner, M., Wypij, D., Ludwig, D.: Relationship between funding source and conclusions among nutrition-related scientific articles. PLoS Med. 4(1), e5. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0090005 (2007)

  • Leuschner, A.: Pluralism and objectivity: exposing and breaking a circle. Stud. Hist. Philos. Sci. 43, 191–198 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longino, H.: Science as Social Knowledge. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  • Longino, H.: Gender, politics, and theoretical virtues. Synthese 104, 383–397 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longino, H.: The Fate of Knowledge. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundh, A., Sismondo, S., Lexchin, J., Busuioc, O.A., Bero, L.: Industry sponsorship and research outcome. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. (Issue 12). Art. No.: MR000033 (2012). doi:10.1002/14651858.MR000033.pub2

  • Musschenga, A., Van der Steen, W., Ho, V.: The business of drug research: a mixed blessing. In: Radder, H. (ed.) The Commodification of Academic Science. Science and the Modern University, pp. 110–131. Pittsburgh University Press, Pittsburgh (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  • Petryna, A.: Clinical trials offshored: on private sector science and public health. Bio Soc. 2, 21–40 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  • Schafer, A.: Biomedical conflicts of interest: a defense of the sequestration thesis—learning from the cases of Nancy Olivieri and David Healy. J. Med. Ethics 30, 8–24 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shamoo, A., Resnik, D.: Responsible Conduct of Research, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapin, S.: Scientific Life. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (2008)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sismondo, S.: Ghost management: how much of the medical literature is shaped behind the scenes by the pharmaceutical industry? PLoS Med 4(9): e286. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040286 (2007)

  • Sismondo, S.: Ghosts in the machine. publication planning in the medical sciences. Soc. Stud. Sci. 39(2), 171–198 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, S., Leslie, L.: Academic Capitalism. Politics, Science, and the Entrepreneurial University. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R.: Medical journals are an extension of the marketing arm of pharmaceutical companies. PloS Med. 2(5), e138 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, T.: “Social” objectivity and the objectivity of values. In: Machamer, P., Wolters, G. (eds.) Science, Values, and Objectivity, pp. 143–171. Pittsburgh University Press, Pittsburgh (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  • Stelfox, H., Chua, G., O’Rourke, K., Detsky, A.: Conflict of interest in the debate over calcium-channel antagonists. N. Engl. J. Med. 338, 101–106 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittington, C.J., Kendall, T., Fonagy, P., Cottrell, D., Cotgrove, A., Boddington, E.: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in childhood depression: systematic review on published and unpublished data. Lancet 363, 1341–1345 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilholt, T.: Bias and values in scientific research. Stud. Hist. Philos. Sci. 40, 92–101 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wyatt, W.J., Midkiff, D.M.: Biological psychiatry: a practice in search of a science. Behav. Soc. Issues 15, 132–151 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland

    Saana Jukola

Authors
  1. Saana Jukola
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saana Jukola .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Science Studies, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark

    Susann Wagenknecht

  2. Department of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, Massachusetts, USA

    Nancy J. Nersessian

  3. Department for Science Education, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Hanne Andersen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Jukola, S. (2015). Longino’s Theory of Objectivity and Commercialized Research. In: Wagenknecht, S., Nersessian, N., Andersen, H. (eds) Empirical Philosophy of Science. Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics, vol 21. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18600-9_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation