Skip to main content

Conflicts of Interest

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Scientific Integrity and Research Ethics

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Ethics ((BRIEFSETHIC))

  • 838 Accesses

Abstract

There are many institutions and relationships that researchers are involved in every day. One’s affiliation to a university, funding agencies, department, corporate partners, or even family and friends may present conflicts of duties that can impede research or cause harm. Sorting out the nature of our duties, and being aware of the various individuals and institutions to which we owe duties, is essential to avoiding the harms that may come. Not all conflicts of interest can be avoided, nor need they be harmful, and so recognizing when and how to avoid, or at least be transparent, about conflicts when they arise and prevent harm when possible is crucial. As with other norms of scientific and research behavior, we can be guided by the Mertonian norms to help navigate the dangers presented by complex collaborative ventures common in modern science, and devise mechanisms that may help us to avoid the harms that may accrue. In this chapter, I try to define a conflict of interest and provide some guidance and examples to help researchers understand them, avoid them, or at least be aware of them and provide the best transparency to the parties involved.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight 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

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ascoli, Marcel, and N. Les Rayons. 1977. Rene BLONDLOT N-Rays. American Journal of Physics 45(3): 281–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashcroft, Richard. 1999. Equipoise, knowledge and ethics in clinical research and practice. Bioethics 13: 314–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barber, Theodore X., and Maurice J. Silver. 1968. Fact, fiction, and the experimenter bias effect. Psychological Bulletin 70(6p2): 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bekelman, Justin E., Yan Li, and Cary P. Gross. 2003. Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: A systematic review. Jama 289(4): 454–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freedman, Benjamin. 1987. Equipoise and the ethics of clinical research. New England journal of medicine 317(3): 141–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kintz, B.L., et al. 1965. The experimenter effect. Psychological Bulletin 63(4): 223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klotz, Irving M. 1980. The N-ray affair. Scientific American 242(5): 122–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kubiak, Cinead R. 2004. Conflicting interests & (and) conflicting laws: Re-aligning the purpose and practice of research ethics committees. Brooklyn Journal of International Law 30: 759.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton, Roger G. 1997. The truth of science: Physical theories and reality. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nye, Mary Jo. 1980. N-rays: An episode in the history and psychology of science. Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 11: 125–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Relman, Arnold S. 1985. Dealing with conflicts of interest. New England Journal of Medicine 313(12): 749–751.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resnik, David. 2004. Disclosing conflicts of interest to research subjects: An ethical and legal analysis. Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance 11(2): 141–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodwin, Marc A. 1993. Medicine, money, and morals: physicians' conflicts of interest. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shrebnivas, Satya. 2000. Who killed Jesse Gelsinger? Ethical issues in human gene therapy. Monash Bioethics Review 19(3): 35–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Lynn, and Jacqueline Fowler Byers. 2002. Gene therapy in the post-Gelsinger era. JONA’S Healthcare Law, Ethics and Regulation 4(4): 104–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinbrook, Robert. 2008. The Gelsinger case. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2011. The Gelsinger case. In The Oxford textbook of clinical research ethics, 110–120. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Koepsell, D. (2017). Conflicts of Interest. In: Scientific Integrity and Research Ethics. SpringerBriefs in Ethics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51277-8_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics