IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02313439.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Neuroethics 1995-2012. A bibliometric analysis of the guiding themes of an emerging research field

Author

Listed:
  • Jon Leefmann

    (EM - EMLyon Business School)

  • Clément Levallois
  • Elisabeth Hildt

Abstract

In bioethics, the first decade of the twenty-first century was characterized by the emergence of interest in the ethical, legal and social aspects of neuroscience research. At the same time an ongoing extension of the topics and phenomena addressed by neuroscientists was observed alongside its rise as one of the leading disciplines in the biomedical science. One of these phenomena addressed by neuroscientists and moral psychologists was the neural processes involved in moral decision-making. Today both strands of research are often addressed under the label of neuroethics. To understand this development we recalled literature from 1995 to 2012 stored in the Mainz Neuroethics Database (i) to investigate the quantitative development of scientific publications in neuroethics; (ii) to explore changes in the topics of neuroethics research within the defined time intervall; (iii) to illustrate the interdependence of different research topics within the neuroethics literature; (iv) to show the development of the distribution of neuroethics research on peer-reviewed journals; and (v) to display the academic background and affiliations of neuroethics researchers. Our analysis exposes that there has been a demonstrative increase of neuroethics research while the issues addressed under this label had mostly been present before the establishment of the field. We show that the research on the ethical, legal and social aspects of neuroscience research is hardly related to neuroscience research on moral decision-making and that the academic backgrounds and affiliations of many neuroethics researchers speak for a very close entanglement of neuroscience and neuroethics. As our article suggests that after more than one decade there still is no dominant agenda for the future of neuroethics research, it calls for more reflection about the theoretical underpinnings and prospects to establish neuroethics as a marked-off research field distinct from neuroscience and the diverse branches of bioethics.

Suggested Citation

  • Jon Leefmann & Clément Levallois & Elisabeth Hildt, 2016. "Neuroethics 1995-2012. A bibliometric analysis of the guiding themes of an emerging research field," Post-Print hal-02313439, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02313439
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Muh-Chyun Tang & Yun Jen Cheng & Kuang Hua Chen, 2017. "A longitudinal study of intellectual cohesion in digital humanities using bibliometric analyses," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 985-1008, November.
    2. Abdulla, Hind & Sleptchenko, Andrei & Nayfeh, Ammar, 2024. "Photovoltaic systems operation and maintenance: A review and future directions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    3. Xingming Ma & Lifeng Zhang & Jingqiu Wang & Yanping Luo, 2019. "Knowledge Domain and Emerging Trends on Echinococcosis Research: A Scientometric Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-15, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    history of neuroethics;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02313439. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.