Methodology and Scientific Competition

Episteme 8 (2):165-183 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Why is the average quality of research in open science so high? The answer seems obvious. Science is highly competitive, and publishing high quality research is the way to rise to the top. Thus, researchers face strong incentives to produce high quality work. However, this is only part of the answer. High quality in science, after all, is what researchers in the relevant field consider to be high quality. Why and how do competing researchers coordinate on common quality standards? I argue that, on the methodological level, science is a dynamic beauty contest.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,642

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Critical Rationalism and Scientific Competition.Max Albert - 2010 - Analyse & Kritik 32 (2):247-266.
Re-Thinking Reproducibility as a Criterion for Research Quality.Sabina Leonelli - 2018 - Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology 36 (B):129-146.
An Argument for Fewer Clinical Trials.Kirstin Borgerson - 2016 - Hastings Center Report 46 (6):25-35.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-06-23

Downloads
9 (#449,242)

6 months
94 (#178,657)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Science, institutions, and values.C. Mantzavinos - 2020 - European Journal of Philosophy 29 (2):379-392.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The sociology of science: theoretical and empirical investigations.Robert King Merton - 1973 - Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Edited by Norman W. Storer.
Traktat über rationale Praxis.Hans Albert - 1982 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 44 (2):376-377.

Add more references