Evolutionary Development: Sustainability … and Beyond!

The act of observation can appear to affect the results of certain scientific experiments. Research has shown that the mind is much more than the brain. The perception of an observer may be significantly affected by the local and non-local environment, and is dependant on the time of the day, month, or year on which those measurements are made. This research has led toward a greater understanding of the structure of the universe, including its connection to consciousness and information. For example, it is demonstrated that the mind's ability to communicate information from across the solar system is much faster than the speed of light.     

Psychology of Science/Theology of Science: Reaching Out or Narrowing?

Formalizing a “psychology of science” today will constrain intellectual freedom in ways more likely stultifying than liberating. We should be more improvisational in seeking ideas from academic psychology to develop a more comprehensive purview. I suggest that a psychology of science should look at systematic theology and empirical theology. Liberal theologians have long experience trying to distill from religion those structural aspects that affirm openness in a search for truth. Science, as well as religion, has its myths and rituals, but theologians are more experienced than scientists at a large mythohistorical scale. There are distortions in the extreme degree to which psychological science has traditionally emphasized empiricism, positivism, hypothesis testing, and falsifiability. I argue for less critical reduction and more creative augmentation. This could include looking outside academia at cognitive competencies of people in trades. Exaggerated parsimony is an old story. This is illustrated by the opposition to David Hartley's 1749 theory of neural oscillations. There is an inexorable “margin of uncertainty” where scientific prediction and control can never outstrip the new uses to which human beings put ideas. Facts and values interact in this margin; theology has long made a home there, but scientists sometimes have been excessive in rejecting the “naturalistic fallacy.” There is also often a degree of disingenuousness in psychology's reluctance to take subjective phenomena seriously; here there may be lessons in how empirical theology has handled subjectivity, as well as in taking an honest look at the way much of the methodology of experimental psychology incorporates subjective assessments. Feist's book is a start, but these things need more thought before codifying a psychology of science.     

Redundant publication in biomedical sciences: Scientific misconduct or necessity?

Redundant publication in biomedical sciences is the presentation of the same information or data set more than once. Forms of redundant publication include “salami slicing”, in which similar text accompanies data presented in disaggregated fashion in different publications and “duplicate or multiple publication” in which identical information is presented with a virtually identical text. Estimates of prevalence of the phenomenon put it at 10 to 25% of published literature. Redundant publication can be considered unethical, or fraudulent, when the author(s) attempt to conceal the existence of duplicate publication from editors and readers. Redundant publication in the area of clinical trials is potentially dangerous as it tends to overestimate the effects of interventions. The scientific community at large and governments should take urgent steps to safeguard the public from the possible effects of fraudulent multiple publications.     

How to blow the Whistle and still have a career afterwards

Filing charges of scientific misconduct can be a risky and dangerous endeavor. This article presents rules of conduct to follow when considering whether to report perceived misconduct, and a set of step-by-step procedures for responsible whistleblowing that describe how to do so once the decision to report misconduct has been made. This advice is framed within the university setting, and may not apply fully in industrial settings. Ms. Gunsalus, an attorney, has been responsible for a wide range of compliance issues and academic policy matters at her university including responding to allegations of scientific misconduct. She served on the United States Commission on Research Integrity and spent six years on the AAAS Committee on Scientific Freedom and Responsibility, four of them as chair. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the symposium entitled “Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don’t: What the Scientific Community Can Do About Whistleblowing” held during the Annual Meeting of the AAAS, Seattle, Washington, 15 February, 1997.     

A Draft for Unifying Controversies in Philosophy of Science

The basic (negative and positive) methodological maxims of three currents of philosophy of science (logical empiricism, falsificationism, and postpositivism) are formulated. Many of these maxims (stratagems) are controversial, e.g., the stance about the nonsense of metaphysics, and that of its indispensability. The restricted validity of these maxims allows for their unification. Within the framework of most of them there may be a relationship of (synchronic, or diachronic) subordination of the contradicting desiderata. In this vein ten stratagems are formulated. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

New Philosophies of Science in North America – Twenty Years Later

This survey of major developments in North American philosophy of science begins with the mid-1960s consolidation of the disciplinary synthesis of internalist history and philosophy of science (HPS) as a response to criticisms of logical empiricism. These developments are grouped for discussion under the following headings: historical metamethodologies, scientific realisms, philosophies of the special sciences, revivals of empiricism, cognitivist naturalisms, social epistemologies, feminist theories of science, studies of experiment and the disunity of science, and studies of science as practice and culture. A unifying theme of the survey is the relation between historical metamethodologists and scientific realists, which dominated philosophical work in the late 1970s. I argue that many of the alternative cognitive naturalisms, social epistemologies, and feminist theories that have been proposed can be understood as analogues to the differences between metamethodological theories of scientific rationality and realist accounts of successful reference to real causal processes. Recent work on experiment, scientific practice, and the culture of science may, however, challenge the underlying conception of the field according to which realism and historical rationalism (or their descendants) are the important alternatives available, and thus may take philosophy of science in new directions. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Antecedent variables of innovation behaviors in organizations: Differences between men and women

IntroductionRelevance of innovation behaviors for organizational success led to study its main individual, job-related and organizational antecedents. Moreover, research on differences in innovation between men and women showed inconclusive results. Ambidexterity (Bledow, Frese, Anderson, Erez, & Farr, 2009) and Zhou and Hoever (2014) call for combining contextual and personal characteristics in innovation research suggest that pathways and variables leading to innovation between men and women could be different.Objective(s)This study aims to analyze if men and women differ in the main antecedents for innovative behaviors. Thus, a moderating effect of gender on the relationship between innovative behaviors and their main antecedent variables is hypothesized. Results are of interest for promoting innovation and empowering women at work context.MethodIn a sample of 458 employees from 16 Spanish companies, we carried out hierarchical regression analyses on innovation behaviors, including as main antecedents academic level, proactive personality, job demands, organizational commitment, HR practices addressed to participation, and transformational leadership. In addition, interaction terms between gender and such antecedents were entered in regression analysis.ResultsProactive personality, HR participation practices, inspirational motivation, job demands and academic level significantly predicted innovative behaviors at their different phases. Moreover, gender moderated the relationship between generation of new ideas with academic level and organizational commitment, and between promotion of ideas with job demands and idealized influence. Organizational commitment promoted generation of ideas among women but not among men, whereas idealized influence is detrimental for women. Reversely, higher job demands stimulate promotion of ideas among men but were detrimental for innovation among women.ConclusionOur results suggest that innovation among women seems to be more sensitive to the influence of leadership and require more social support, whereas higher job demands are detrimental. These results suggest that innovation is more related to intrinsic variables (as self-confidence, empowerment and social processes) among women, whereas for men, it seems to be more related to work demands. Results could help companies to stimulate innovation, between both men and women.     

KAGAWA TOYOHIKO (1888–1960): WITNESS TO THE COSMIC DRAMA

At home and abroad, Kagawa Toyohiko was probably the best‐known Japanese Christian evangelist, social reformer, writer, and public intellectual of the twentieth century, nominated for the Nobel Prize in Literature twice (1947, 1948) and the Nobel Peace Prize three times (1954, 1955, 1956). Appealing to the masses with little knowledge of Christian faith, Kagawa believed that a positive, religio‐aesthetic interpretation of nature and science was a key missiological concern in Japan. He reasoned that a faith rooted in the kenotic movement of incarnation and self‐giving must strongly support the scientific quest. A voracious reader of science and especially biology, he argues for “directionality,” or what he calls “initial purpose” in the long, painful, cosmic journey from matter to life to mind (or consciousness). Through an antireductionistic, a posteriori methodological pluralism that sought to “see all things whole,” this “scientific mystic” employed Christian, Buddhist, Neo‐Confucian, personalist, and vitalist ideas to envision complementary roles for science and religion in modern society.     

真实创新预览、企业可雇佣性责任感与可雇佣型建言的关系

以59家科技型创业企业368名知识员工为被试,从新型员工—组织关系模式下个体认知的视角,探讨了企业真实创新预览与知识员工可雇佣型建言的关系,以及知识员工之企业可雇佣性责任感的中介作用。PLSSEM分析结果表明:(1)企业真实创新预览对知识员工的企业可雇佣性责任感各维度、可雇佣型建言具有显著正向影响;(2)知识员工的企业可雇佣性责任感各维度中,基于角色内胜任力提高、基于角色外能力提升2个维度对知识员工可雇佣型建言具有显著正向影响,并在企业真实创新预览与知识员工可雇佣型建言之间起部分中介作用;而基于个人生涯发展维度对知识员工可雇佣型建言的影响不显著,其在企业真实创新预览与知识员工可雇佣型建言之间也不起中介作用。