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.

Integrating autistic perspectives into autism science: A role for autistic autobiographies.

LAY ABSTRACT: Autism science faces challenges in how to think about autism and what questions to focus on, and sometimes contributes to stigma against autistic people. We examine one way that non-autistic researchers may start to combat these challenges: by reading and reflecting on autistic people's descriptions of their personal experiences (e.g. autobiographies) of what it is like to be autistic. In this article, we review some of the advantages and challenges of this approach and how it may help combat some of the challenges currently facing autism science by focusing studies on the questions autistic people find most important, counteracting stereotypes, and increasing understanding of autistic experiences.

A Social Psychological Model of Scientific Practices: Explaining Research Practices and Outlining the Potential for Successful Reforms.

A crescendo of incidents have raised concerns about whether scientific practices in psychology may be suboptimal, sometimes leading to the publication, dissemination, and application of unreliable or misinterpreted findings. Psychology has been a leader in identifying possibly suboptimal practices and proposing reforms that might enhance the efficiency of the scientific process and the publication of robust evidence and interpretations. To help shape future efforts, this paper offers a model of the psychological and socio-structural forces and processes that may influence scientists' practices. The model identifies practices targeted by interventions and reforms, and which practices remain unaddressed. The model also suggests directions for empirical research to assess how best to enhance the effectiveness of psychological inquiry.