Academic Twitter: can anyone explain to me what constitutes a conflict of interest? Or should we create a new category of "ideological conflict of interest"?pic.twitter.com/p7JaeAQbHF
Show this thread
-
Show this thread
I normally interpret it narrowly as economic interest such as employment and stock ownership. Otherwise it can quickly be interpreted very broadly to attack opponents.
-
-
So, research promoted and funded by advocacy groups, it’s OK? Can we reliably say that those research projects serve science and knowledge alone? At least they could acknowledge it as problematic and warn us about it.
-
I’m not sure how I feel. At minimum, the authors should disclose funding. So, I agree with you, I think. Acknowledge and warn.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Very true. I don't think having an "ideological conflict of interest" should be unacceptable, but maybe we should come up with some incentive for the opposite. A "badge" or something for adversarial collaborations or conclusions that contradict preregistered ideologies
-
From a libertarian/anarchist perspective, anyone working for the state would acknowledge that as a conflict of interest. After all, they are working for people who enforce tax laws with guns and theft, so their research will tend to support it. (Not my view, just saying.)
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.