Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Responsible Reporting: Neuroimaging News in the Age of Responsible Research and Innovation.Irja Marije de Jong, Frank Kupper, Marlous Arentshorst & Jacqueline Broerse - 2016 - Science and Engineering Ethics 22 (4):1107-1130.
    Besides offering opportunities in both clinical and non-clinical domains, the application of novel neuroimaging technologies raises pressing dilemmas. ‘Responsible Research and Innovation’ (RRI) aims to stimulate research and innovation activities that take ethical and social considerations into account from the outset. We previously identified that Dutch neuroscientists interpret “responsible innovation” as educating the public on neuroimaging technologies via the popular press. Their aim is to mitigate (neuro)hype, an aim shared with the wider emerging RRI community. Here, we present results of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Hype and Public Trust in Science.Zubin Master & David B. Resnik - 2013 - Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (2):321-335.
    Social scientists have begun elucidating the variables that influence public trust in science, yet little is known about hype in biotechnology and its effects on public trust. Many scholars claim that hyping biotechnology results in a loss of public trust, and possibly public enthusiasm or support for science, because public expectations of the biotechnological promises will be unmet. We argue for the need for empirical research that examines the relationships between hype, public trust, and public enthusiasm/support. We discuss the complexities (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  • Neuroconcerns: Some Responses to My Critics.Jonathan H. Marks - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 1 (2):W1-W3.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Arts and Sciences of Reading: Humanities in The Laboratory.Lindsey Grubbs - 2016 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 7 (2):85-94.
    This article examines two recent scientific studies about reading fiction in order to argue for more thoroughly interdisciplinary work that crosses the too-often-upheld boundary between the humanities and sciences. Taking one of these in particular as a case study, I explore how including a humanist in the experimental process could have impacted many stages of inquiry: from developing more interesting and better contextualized research questions and methods, to providing rhetorical expertise that could reduce the role of “neurohype” as research moves (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations