|Appears in Collections:||Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport Journal Articles|
|Peer Review Status:||Refereed|
|Title:||IBM, Elsevier Science, and Academic Freedom|
|Authors:||Bailar, John C|
Levy, Barry S
Teitelbaum, Daniel Thau
|Citation:||Bailar JC, Cicolella A, Harrison R, LaDou J, Levy BS, Rohm T, Teitelbaum DT, Wang Y, Watterson A & Yoshida F (2007) IBM, Elsevier Science, and Academic Freedom, 13 (3), pp. 312-317.|
|Abstract:||Elsevier Science refused to publish a study of IBM workers that IBM sought to keep from public view. Occupational and environmental health (OEH) suffers from the absence of a level playing field on which science can thrive. Industry pays for a substantial portion of OEH research. Studies done by private consulting firms or academic institutions may be published if the results suit the sponsoring companies, or they may be censored. OEH journals often reflect the dominance of industry influence on research in the papers they publish, sometimes withdrawing or modifying papers in line with industry and advertising agendas. Although such practices are widely recognized, no fundamental change is supported by government and industry or by professional organizations.|
|Rights:||The publisher has granted permission for use of the publisher version of the article in this repository. The article was first published in the International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health http://www.ijoeh.com/index.php/ijoeh; Rights Information already obtained from submitter.|
|Watterson - IBM Elsevier Science and Academic Freedom.pdf||60.75 kB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
This item is protected by original copyright
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact email@example.com providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.