The Obligations of American Social Scientists
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 7102248 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Philip Green (0009-0006-6434-2052, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1971 |
| Volume | 394 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 13-27 |
| Publication date | 1971-03-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0002-7162 • E-ISSN: 1552-3349 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/000271627139400103 |
| OpenAlex | W2058657546 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 8 |
The involvement of social scientists with government poses a serious threat to the independence of social science. In order that social science may be useful to government officials, it must meet their criteria of reality and practicality. At the technical level this may mean accepting official categories of discourse; more broadly it will mean that certain problems do not get studied, unless the research can be structured so as to suggest "constructive" and politically tenable solutions, and unless the social scientist adopts a manipulative attitude toward the subjects of his research. The HEW document, Toward a Social Report, and Project Camelot illustrate some of these difficulties. Complete independence of social scientists from public or private external influence is impossible, however. Their adherence to a posture of "counter-valence"—for example, diversifying their sources of patronage and favoring less powerful groups and institutions as clients— would come closest to achieving the practicable equivalent of such intellectual independence. In particular, they should avoid lending themselves to any strengthening of the Presidency or other institutions of centralization, and to any furtherance of officials' manipulative attitude toward mass opinion. In their professional associations they should, finally, adopt ethical canons in pursuit of these ends
Constructive · Government (linguistics · Independence (probability theory · Political science · Politics · Presidency · Public opinion · Public relations · Sociology · Academic Freedom and Politics · Contemporary Sociological Theory and Practice · Law · Psychology · Research, Science, and Academia · Social Psychology
Varieties of materialism
Gatekeepers and the Social Control of Social Research
Summing Up, Starting New
Social Indicators and the Mondale Initiative
Academics in Japan's Advisory Council System
Federal funding and its effect on criminological research
Policy Analysis in Political Science
Social Scientists and Public Administration in the Lula da Silva Government
| Unique citing works | 8 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0.15 |
| Citation span | 1972 - 2009 (38) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 8 |