/* Allow centering of WPBakery Columns */
Select Portfolio
-1
archive,post-type-archive,post-type-archive-portfolio_page,qode-social-login-1.1.3,qode-restaurant-1.1.1,stockholm-core-1.2.1,select-child-theme-ver-1.0.0,select-theme-ver-5.2.1,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-6.1,vc_responsive
Title Image

Archive

cover of experimental philosophy-of-science-and-philosophical-differences across the sciences

Experimental Philosophy of Science and Philosophical Differences across the Sciences

This paper contributes to the underdeveloped field of experimental philosophy of science. We examine variability in the philosophical views of scientists. Using data from Toolbox Dialogue Initiative, we analyze scientists’ responses to prompts on philosophical issues (methodology, confirmation, values, reality, reductionism, and motivation for scientific

Photo of article cover: A virtue-based responsible conduct of research curriculum

A virtue-based responsible conduct of research curriculum: Pilot test results

Drawing on Pennock’s theory of scientific virtues, we are developing an alternative curriculum for training scientists in the responsible conduct of research (RCR) that emphasizes internal values rather than externally imposed rules. This approach focuses on the virtuous characteristics of scientists that lead to responsible

Thumbnail image of article The need for social ethics in interdisciplinary environmental science graduate programs: Results from a nation-wide survey in the United States

What is collaborative, interdisciplinary reasoning? The heart of Interdisciplinary Team Research

Aim/Purpose Collaborative, interdisciplinary research is growing rapidly, but we still have limited and fragmented understanding of what is arguably the heart of such research—collaborative, interdisciplinary reasoning (CIR). Background This article integrates neo-Pragmatist theories of reasoning with insights from literature on interdisciplinary research to develop a working definition of

Cover of Comparing Methods for Cross-Disciplinary Research

Comparing Methods for Cross-Disciplinary Research

The methods of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research (hereafter, “cross-disciplinary research” or CDR) are “fragmented”, that is, distributed in unconnected ways across the intellectual landscape. Fragmentation results in inefficiency, which motivates systematic organization of methods. Systematic organization has value for both cross-disciplinary practitioners and theorists since