476 



jud^-ment accepted by others in his discipline? Is his knowledge of the 

 subject up to date? Does it encompass the particular matter at issue? 

 Is the witness a proponent of an unorthodox view in his own discipline? 

 Does he aspire to advance some particular field of research? Does his 

 own career or academic preferment depend on his success in advancing 

 a particular teclinical or scientific outcome, or a political decision 

 favoring such an outcome? Is there some particular i>olitical interest 

 group whose views are congenial to the scientific course he advocates ? 

 Does his discipline share an identifiable interest with some economic 

 institution or faction? 



Grovernment scientists are a special case. In addition t/O their dis- 

 ciplinary bias, they also have an agency affiliation, a commitment to 

 agency orthodoxy, and an obligation to support agency policies and 

 programs. They also have an obligation inherent in all civil servants 

 to assist the Congress. It would seem to be difficult for both the witness 

 and the congressional committee to keep clearly in mind the complica- 

 tions of such testimony, when witnesses are simultaneously expected 

 to observe the canons of scientific objectivity, agency loyalty, and 

 personal commitment. 



In addition to their scientific obligations and affiliations, scientists 

 cannot help bringing to an issue some measure of political value- 

 judgment. Scientists vote and affiliate in political parties. They pos- 

 sess social values. They are members of one or more interest groups 

 with objectives and programs. They have personal ambitions and favor 

 particular national goals. In his own field, the scientist can usually 

 leani to screen out these sources of bias, but in testifying more gen- 

 erally on scientific matters related to a political issue, the scientist may 

 unwittingly testify mainly as a citizen rather than as an objective and 

 disciplined expert. Even if he is summoned to testify as an expert, 

 he is often invited to express his views as a citizen as well. 



Procedures and methodology used in the study 



On the basis of a survey of the literature of congressional decisions 

 since World War II, 14 cases were selected for the study. The criteria 

 for selection were that the cases should have evoked some debate, in- 

 volved a definable issue on which a definable decision was reached, had 

 substantial scientific or technological content, and presented technical 

 difficulties. It was also important that the cases be broadly representa- 

 tive of subject areas, kinds of decision mechanism, and kinds of deci- 

 sions. The following 14 oases were selected : 



1. AD-X2 battery additive 



2. The point IV program 



3. Inclusion of the social sciences in the National Science Founda- 



tion 



4. Camelot (applied social science research) 



5. Mohole (National Science Foundation project in earth 



science) 



6. The Test Ban Treaty 



7. The Peace Corps 



8. High energv i^hvsics 



9. The Office of Coal Eesearch 



10. Distribution of the Salk vaccine 



