{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012113055181695828, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.153846153846154, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Competing Accountability Frameworks and the Role of Interdisciplinary Practice for Publicly Funded Scientists and Scientists within Government

Abstract:Publicly funded scientists and scientists within government juggle an array of accountability arrangements. They answer to peers, government officials, and society. This paper examines the types of accountability experienced by these scientists in the United States. It recounts the historical events that prompted various forms of accountability and it explores common themes in the debates surrounding scientific accountability. Finally, the paper suggests that interdisciplinarity has emerged as a possible solution to the problem of scientists accounting for their actions to laypeople.