Basing Science Ethics on Respect for Human Dignity.

A "no ethics" principle has long been prevalent in science and has demotivated deliberation on scientific ethics. This paper argues the following: (1) An understanding of a scientific "ethos" based on actual "value preferences" and "value repugnances" prevalent in the scientific community permits and demands critical accounts of the "no ethics" principle in science. (2) The roots of this principle may be traced to a repugnance of human dignity, which was instilled at a historical breaking point in the interrelation between science and ethics. This breaking point involved granting science the exclusive mandate to pass judgment on the life worth living. (3) By contrast, respect for human dignity, in its Kantian definition as "the absolute inner worth of being human," should be adopted as the basis to ground science ethics. (4) The pathway from this foundation to the articulation of an ethical duty specific to scientific practice, i.e., respect for objective truth, is charted by Karl Popper's discussion of the ethical principles that form the basis of science. This also permits an integrated account of the "external" and "internal" ethical problems in science. (5) Principles of the respect for human dignity and the respect for objective truth are also safeguards of epistemic integrity. Plain defiance of human dignity by genetic determinism has compromised integrity of claims to knowledge in behavioral genetics and other behavioral sciences. Disregard of the ethical principles that form the basis of science threatens epistemic integrity.

Linguistic precision, and declared use of ChatGPT, needed for radiology literature.

There is a need to ensure the accuracy of linguistic descriptors in the medical literature, including that related to radiology, to allow peers and professionals to communicate ideas and scientific results in a clear and unambiguous manner. This letter highlights an issue that could undermine the clarity of scientific writing in radiology literature, namely the presence of non-standard terminology for established jargon, and emphasizes the need for authors to transparently declare the use of language editing services and AI-driven tools, such as ChatGPT, if these have been used to formulate text and ideas in their papers. Ultimately, clear radiology papers that are compliant with current publishing ethics will serve radiologists and patients well.

Blinded with science: Trivial graphs and formulas increase ad persuasiveness and belief in product efficacy.

The appearance of being scientific can increase persuasiveness. Even trivial cues can create such an appearance of a scientific basis. In our studies, including simple elements, such as graphs (Studies 1-2) or a chemical formula (Study 3), increased belief in a medication's efficacy. This appears to be due to the association of such elements with science, rather than increased comprehensibility, use of visuals, or recall. Belief in science moderates the persuasive effect of graphs, such that people who have a greater belief in science are more affected by the presence of graphs (Study 2). Overall, the studies contribute to past research by demonstrating that even trivial elements can increase public persuasion despite their not truly indicating scientific expertise or objective support.