Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form should not include questions about personal beliefs, activities or life-style
As one of the Associate Editors of Child Development I wrote a letter to the Publication Committee of the SRCD to point out that the non-financial conflict of interests disclosure is an encroachment of some fundamental human rights including freedom of speech.
See the statement here:
A paragraph from the statement:
Newton believed in astrology, Einstein was a pacifist during war-time, Heidegger was a Nazi, Sartre a Maoist, Darwin has been accused of being an atheist and an anti-feminist, Watson (discoverer of the double helix) a sexist like Trivers, and many other scientists who did great work: whatever we feel about such beliefs, as scientists (authors, reviewers, editors) we should try to evaluate their work as part of World 3 in the sense of Karl Popper, without ties to the person who conducted a study and wrote a paper: not the author but the text and the data reported in the text are the only important object of scrutiny. Otherwise there is a risk of a new kind of McCarthyism of which Linus Pauling like many other scientists did suffer in the fifties, or closer to modern times: a risk of Erdogan-type of persecution experienced by our scientific colleagues in Turkey, dismissed without due process from their tenured positions because of their political ideas.
The good news is that the Publication Committee of the SRCD decided last month to delete this part of the Conflict of Interest Form! I am grateful to the Committee members for discussing my issues seriously and to decide accordingly.
Bad news too
•Van IJzendoorn, M.H. & Bakermans-Kranenburg, M.J. (2014, May 21). ‘Tackling child behaviour problems effectively requires better understanding of differences between an ‘orchid’ child and a ‘dandelion’ child’. Retrieved from Child and Family Blog
• Securely attached to science. Psychologist, (2013), 26(9), 639.
• Wall Street Journal, interview with Jonathan Rockoff on differential susceptibility, September 17, 2013, on page D2 in the U.S. edition
• Neue Zuercher Zeitung, December 23, 2010, on differential susceptibility
• Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, January 24 2010, on adoption from Haiti
• The Atlantic Monthly, December issue 2009, pp 60-68, interview with David Dobbs on Orchid Children
• Mare, Leiden University Weekly, December 13, 2007, listed with 3 papers in the ranking of the 10 most frequently cited Leiden University papers since
1981 in the social and behavioral sciences (ranks 1, 2, and 9).
• HP/De Tijd November 30, 2007, listed as one of the 20 most influential scientists/ thinkers in the Netherlands
• Minneapolis Star Tribune (May 24, 2005) interview with L. Tanner + J. Hopfensperger: Foreign adoptees adjust well in new homelands
• Miami Herald (May 25, 2005) interview with L. Tanner: Study: Kids adopted from abroad adapt well (also in: Chicago Tribune, Boston Globe, and Los
Angeles Times (May 24, 2005)
• The New York Times, The New York Post, USA Today and The Washington Post (May 25, 2005)
• Forbes (May 25, 2005) interview with R. Preidt: International Adoptees At Lower Risk of Behavior Problems
• BBC World Radio interview May 25, 2005, on International vs national adoptions
• Wall Street Journal, April 12 2005, interview with Sue Shellenbarger: Child care boost academics, hurt behavior.