ASA Scientific and Public Affairs Advisory Committee
At its April meeting, the ASA Board approved the process for determining when the ASA should take a position on an issue through a statement, amicus brief, or other means. The process builds on the board’s 2017 set of five questions that has been used to guide discussion for when the ASA should make a public statement on an issue.
Such a process was proposed by the ASA Scientific and Public Affairs Advisory Committee (SPAAC) because its members thought an open and transparent procedure would help demonstrate the ASA’s credibility and help the ASA avoid being overburdened should the rate of requests increase. A draft of the proposed process was published in the March issue with a request for comments.
Based on the 13 comments received, SPAAC revised the draft and advanced it to the ASA Board. These constructive comments helped strengthen the process from the one published in March.
In the Scope and Guidance section, a paragraph was added near the beginning to clarify that the proposed process does not apply to letters and calls for comments, the process for which is briefly explained. Text was added to note the bylaws empower the ASA Board to act in a way it believes is in the best interests of the association, without requiring it to poll members for their input. Finally for that section, a step was added to direct that “The Professional Issues and Visibility Council (PI&V) should be notified of a statement in development or consideration by the ASA unit leading the effort.”
In the Process section, the steps were reordered to be chronological and it was stipulated that requesters should specify any conflicts of interest. A timeline for staff to act was also added to ensure sensitivity to timeliness. In addition, once staff have selected the ASA committee or entity to evaluate an outside request, it is stipulated they will also inform PI&V. This is to provide other PI&V committees an opportunity to comment if they choose.
The board also accepted our proposed two additional questions to the original five: (i) Is the ASA particularly well positioned to respond to the issue? and (ii) Does the issue involve an unambiguous violation of accepted norms of practice in statistical science or the ethical principles of the profession? These are questions #1 and #6 in the list of seven in the process.
This new process is now posted at the top of the ASA Board Statements page and ASA letters page.
This is a living document and may be amended as circumstances warrant.
Leave a Reply