Prosocial motives underlie scientific censorship by scientists: A perspective and research agenda.

Science is among humanity's greatest achievements, yet scientific censorship is rarely studied empirically. We explore the social, psychological, and institutional causes and consequences of scientific censorship (defined as actions aimed at obstructing particular scientific ideas from reaching an audience for reasons other than low scientific quality). Popular narratives suggest that scientific censorship is driven by authoritarian officials with dark motives, such as dogmatism and intolerance. Our analysis suggests that scientific censorship is often driven by scientists, who are primarily motivated by self-protection, benevolence toward peer scholars, and prosocial concerns for the well-being of human social groups. This perspective helps explain both recent findings on scientific censorship and recent changes to scientific institutions, such as the use of harm-based criteria to evaluate research. We discuss unknowns surrounding the consequences of censorship and provide recommendations for improving transparency and accountability in scientific decision-making to enable the exploration of these unknowns. The benefits of censorship may sometimes outweigh costs. However, until costs and benefits are examined empirically, scholars on opposing sides of ongoing debates are left to quarrel based on competing values, assumptions, and intuitions.

Harm Hypervigilance in Public Reactions to Scientific Evidence.

Two preregistered studies from two different platforms with representative U.S. adult samples (N = 1,865) tested the harm-hypervigilance hypothesis in risk assessments of controversial behavioral science. As expected, across six sets of scientific findings, people consistently overestimated others' harmful reactions (medium to large average effect sizes) and underestimated helpful ones, even when incentivized for accuracy. Additional analyses found that (a) harm overestimations were associated with support for censoring science, (b) people who were more offended by scientific findings reported greater difficulty understanding them, and (c) evidence was moderately consistent for an association between more conservative ideology and harm overestimations. These findings are particularly relevant because journals have begun evaluating potential downstream harms of scientific findings. We discuss implications of our work and invite scholars to develop rigorous tests of (a) the social pressures that lead science astray and (b) the actual costs and benefits of publishing or not publishing potentially controversial conclusions.

(In)tolerância como política: os discursos de direita e de esquerda no facebook / (In)tolerance as policy: the rightist and leftist discourses on facebook / (In)tolerancia como política: los discursos de la derecha y la izquierda en facebook

Este estudo tem como objetivo analisar traços da mentalidade potencialmente autoritária a partir do discurso de usuários do Facebook vinculados a páginas de cunho político autodeclarado de direita e de esquerda no Brasil. A Netnografia é utilizada como aporte metodológico para imersão on-line nas páginas "Eu era Direita e não sabia" e "Jovens de Esquerda", selecionadas por meio do Facebook Audience Insights, ferramenta disponibilizada pelo Facebook. Delas, foram extraídas oito postagens com maior engajamento (número de comentários, curtidas e compartilhamentos), identificadas pelo Netvizz. Foram coletados 3.489 comentários, os quais foram organizados em um corpus textual submetido ao software IRAMUTEQ e analisados sob a perspectiva da análise crítica imanente da teoria crítica. Como resultado, apresenta-se a forma como o pensamento autoritário se manifesta na racionalização da sociedade contemporânea e nas práticas discursivas em redes sociais on-line, enraizada no âmbito sociopolítico brasileiro, ameaçando o processo democrático e a construção de uma sociedade plural e liberta.(AU)

This study aims to analyze traits of the potentially authoritarian mentality from the speech of Facebook users linked to political pages self-declared as rightist and leftist in Brazil. Netnography is used as a methodological contribution for online immersion in the pages "Eu era Direita e não sabia" and "Jovens de Esquerda" selected via Facebook Audience Insights, a tool provided by Facebook. From these, eight posts with greater engagement (number of comments, likes and shares), identified by Netvizz, were extracted. We collected 3,489 comments, which were organized in a textual corpus submitted to IRAMUTEQ software and analyzed from the perspective of immanent critical analysis of Critical Theory. As a result, we present the way in which authoritarian thinking manifests itself in the rationalization of contemporary society and in discursive practices in online social networks, rooted in the Brazilian socio-political sphere, threatening the democratic process and the construction of a plural and free society.(AU)

Este estudio tiene como objetivo analizar las huellas de la mentalidad potencialmente autoritaria a partir de los discursos de usuarios en Facebook vinculados a páginas políticas autodeclaradas de derecha y de izquierda en Brasil. La netnografía se utiliza como marco metodológico para la inmersión en línea en las páginas "Eu era Direita e não sabia" y "Jovens de Esquerda", seleccionadas por Facebook Audience Insights, herramienta proporcionada por Facebook. Se extrajeron las ocho publicaciones con mayor compromiso (número de comentarios, gustos y compartidas), identificadas por Netvizz. Se recogieron 3.489 comentarios, los cuales fueron organizados en un corpus textual sometido al software IRAMUTEQ y analizado bajo la perspectiva del análisis crítico inmanente de la teoría crítica. Los resultados presentan la forma en que el pensamiento autoritario se manifiesta en la racionalización de la sociedad contemporánea y en prácticas discursivas en redes sociales en línea, arraigada en el ámbito sociopolítico brasileño, que amenazan el proceso democrático y la construcción de una sociedad plural y liberada.(AU)

Renegar del agujero en el caldero: defensas inconsistentes sobre el experimento de gemelos de Neubauer / To deny the hole in the cauldron Inconsistent defenses over Neubauer's twin experiment

El documental Three Identical Strangers, de Tim Waldle (2018) revela una investigación secreta sobre el desarrollo de hermanos genéticamente idénticos separados de manera deliberada para ser criados en circunstancias diferentes. Desde su estreno el experimento expuesto ha provocado una serie de rechazos en la opinión pública y entre los profesionales de la salud mental. El presente trabajo analiza los argumentos de los psiquiatras y psicoanalistas Leon Hoffman y Lois Oppenheim, que han cuestionado el documental y defendido el experimento, para analizar sus argumentos y evaluar si los mismos son consistentes o, por el contrario, pretenden legitimar una investigación éticamente inaceptable

Tim Waldle documentary film Three Identical Strangers (2018), reveals a secret investigation on the development of genetically identical siblings who were separated on purpose so as to be raised in different social contexts. Since it´s premiere, the exposed experiment has caused a series of rejections among public opinion and mental health professionals. This paper focuses in the arguments of psychiatrists Leon Hoffman and Lois Oppenheim in defense of the experiment and against the film, so as to analyzse if their arguments are consistent, or on the contrary, they pretend to legitimate an ethically unacceptable investigation.

Informative censoring due to missing data in quality of life was inadequately assessed in most oncology randomized controlled trials.

Objective We aimed to systematically characterize reporting missing quality of life (QoL) data in oncology randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and to estimate prevalence of adequate reporting according to existing guidelines. Study Design and Setting This cross-sectional analysis includes all articles on anti-cancer drugs tested in RCTs in six high impact medical/oncology journals, published between January 2015 and May 2020, that reported QoL outcomes. From 1942 identified articles, 215 (11%) met inclusion criteria. Data abstracted included whether compliance for QoL assessment were reported, whether results from a missing data statistical analysis were reported, whether articles met current recommendations for reporting missing data in QoL assessments. Results The results from a missing data statistical analysis were available in 22 trials (10.2%). Overall, 16 trials (7.4%) met current recommendations for reporting missing data in QoL assessments. Articles specifically reporting on QoL or patient reported outcomes were more likely to meet recommendations than other reports (P < 0.0001). Conclusion This systematic cross-sectional study found that most oncology RCTs reporting on QoL do not report adequately on missing data in QoL, with only 7.4% of trials meeting current reporting guidelines. The possibility of informative censoring, therefore, cannot be assessed in most of trials.

Strengthening the interpretability of clinical trial results by assessing the effect of informative censoring on the primary estimand in PRECISION.

BACKGROUND: The ICH E9(R1) addendum states that the strategy to account for intercurrent events should be included when defining an estimand, the treatment effect to be estimated based on the study objective. The estimator used to assess the treatment effect needs to be aligned with the estimand that accounted for intercurrent events. Regardless of the strategy, missing data resulting from patient premature withdrawal could undermine the robustness of the study results. Informative censoring due to dropouts in an events-based study is one such example. Sensitivity analyses using imputation methods are useful to examine the uncertainty due to informative censoring and address the robustness and strength of the study results. METHODS: We assessed the effect of premature patient withdrawal in the PRECISION study, a randomized non-inferiority clinical trial of patients with chronic arthritic pain that compared the cardiovascular safety of three nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs-based treatment policies or paradigms. The protocol-defined use of concomitant or rescue medications was permitted since changes in pain medications due to insufficient analgesia were expected in patients in this long-term study. Anticipating that premature study discontinuations could potentially lead to informative censoring, a supplementary analysis was pre-specified in which censored outcomes due to the premature study discontinuation were imputed based on adverse events that were clinically associated with the primary endpoint (cardiovascular outcome based on the Antiplatelet Trialists Collaboration composite endpoint). Furthermore, tipping point analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the primary analysis results by assuming data censored not at random. The level of increase at which the primary study conclusion would change was estimated. RESULTS: For the analysis of time to first primary endpoint event through 30 months, 4065 out of the 24,081 enrolled patients were lost to follow-up, withdrew consent, or were no longer willing to participate in the study. These withdrawals occurred gradually and resulted in a cumulative total of 5893 censored patient-years of observation (10.2%). The rate of discontinuation and the baseline characteristics of the discontinued patients were similar across the three treatment groups. The non-inferiority conclusion from the primary analysis was confirmed in the supplementary analysis incorporating relevant adverse events. Furthermore, tipping point analyses demonstrated that in order to lose non-inferiority in the primary analysis, the risk of primary endpoint events during the censored observation time would have to increase by more than 2.7-fold in the celecoxib group while remaining constant in the other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs groups, demonstrating that the scenarios where the study results are invalid appear not plausible. CONCLUSIONS: Supplementary and sensitivity analyses presented to address informative censoring in PRECISION helped to further interpret and strengthen the study results.

National Socialist Medical Literature and the Censorship Practices in the Soviet Occupation Zone and Early East German State.

This study examines how medical discourse and culture were affected by the denazification policies of the Soviet occupation authorities in East Germany. Examining medical textbooks in particular, it reveals how the production and dissemination of medical knowledge was subject to a complex process of negotiation among authors, publishers, and censorship officials. Drawing on primary-source material produced by censorship authorities that has not been rigorously examined to date, it reveals how knowledge production processes were structured by broader ideological and political imperatives. It thus sheds new light on a unique chapter in the history of censorship.

The bounded heavens: defining the limits of astrological practice in the Iberian indices.

This paper explores the rules for the expurgation of texts of astrology in the Iberian Indices of forbidden books. It addresses the prohibitions put forward in Rule IX of the Index of Trent and the bull Coeli et terrae of Sixtus V, and studies its impact on the rules and their interpretation in the Spanish and Portuguese Indices, in particular, those published in the first decades of the seventeenth century: the Spanish Index librorum prohibitorum et expurgatorum of 1612 and the Portuguese Index auctorum damnatae memoriae of 1624. It shows how these indices offer a more meticulous examination of the prohibitions providing not only more detail regarding the different practices of astrology, but also explicitly accept the doctrine of inclinations of Thomas Aquinas as a central rule to deal with astrological judgments on human behaviour. It also highlights some specific details of the practice of censorship of astrological books by examining case studies of censored Portuguese and Spanish astrological publications. These provide new dimensions and highlight significant differences between the theoretical rules, practical guidelines, and actual restriction of astrological content.

Preludes to the Inquisition: self-censorship in medieval astrological discourse.

Astrologers have exercised self-censorship throughout the centuries in order to fend off criticism. This was largely for religious reasons, but social, political, and ethical motivations also have to be taken into account. This paper explores the main reasons that led astrologers to increase censorship in their writings in the decades that preceded the Church's regulations and offers some examples of this self-imposed restraint in astrological judgements.