David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Hypatia 26 (2):352-373 (2011)
An empirically sensitive formulation of the norms of transformative criticism must recognize that even public and shared standards of evaluation can be implemented in ways that unintentionally perpetuate and reproduce forms of social bias that are epistemically detrimental. Helen Longino's theory can explain and redress such social bias by treating peer evaluations as hypotheses based on data and by requiring a kind of perspectival diversity that bears, not on the content of the community's knowledge claims, but on the beliefs and norms of the culture of the knowledge community itself. To illustrate how socializing cognition can bias evaluations, we focus on peer-review practices, with some discussion of peer-review practices in philosophy. Data include responses to surveys by editors from general philosophy journals, as well as analyses of reviews and editorial decisions for the 2007 Cognitive Science Society Conference
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Miranda Fricker (2007). Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford University Press.
Helen Longino (2002). The Fate of Knowledge. Princeton University Press.
Helen E. Longino (1990). Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry. Princeton University Press.
Richard E. Nisbett & Timothy D. Wilson (1977). Telling More Than We Can Know: Verbal Reports on Mental Processes. Psychological Review 84 (3):231-59.
Luc Boltanski & Laurent Thévenot (2006). On Justification: Economies of Worth. Princeton University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Raoul Gervais (2013). Non-Cognitive Values and Objectivity in Scientific Explanation: Egalitarianism and the Case of the Movius Line. Perspectives on Science 21 (4):429-452.
Carole J. Lee (2012). A Kuhnian Critique of Psychometric Research on Peer Review. Philosophy of Science 79 (5):859-870.
Susann Wagenknecht (2015). Facing the Incompleteness of Epistemic Trust: Managing Dependence in Scientific Practice. Social Epistemology 29 (2):160-184.
Similar books and articles
Carole J. Lee & Christian D. Schunn (2011). Social Biases and Solution for Procedural Objectivity. Hypatia 26 (2):352-73.
Carole J. Lee, Cassidy R. Sugimoto, Guo Zhang & Blaise Cronin (2013). Bias in Peer Review. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64 (1):2-17.
Bart Victor, Linda Klebe Trevino & Debra L. Shapiro (1993). Peer Reporting of Unethical Behavior: The Influence of Justice Evaluations and Social Context Factors. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 12 (4):253 - 263.
Ronald N. Kostoff (1997). The Principles and Practices of Peer Review. Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):19-34.
Mark Alfano (2011). Explaining Away Intuitions About Traits: Why Virtue Ethics Seems Plausible (Even If It Isn't). Review of Philosophy and Psychology 2 (1):121-136.
C. Daryl Cameron, Joshua Knobe & B. Keith Payne (2010). Do Theories of Implicit Race Bias Change Moral Judgments? Social Justice Research 23:272-289.
Jeffrey J. Rachlinski, Sheri Lynn Johnson, Andrew J. Wistrich & Chris Guthrie, Does Unconscious Racial Bias Affect Trial Judges?
Boaz Miller (2013). When is Consensus Knowledge Based? Distinguishing Shared Knowledge From Mere Agreement. Synthese 190 (7):1293-1316.
Karyn L. Freedman (2009). Diversity and the Fate of Objectivity. Social Epistemology 23 (1):45-56.
Malcolm Williams (2006). Can Scientists Be Objective? Social Epistemology 20 (2):163 – 180.
Wendy Lipworth, Ian Kerridge, Stacy Carter & Miles Little (2011). Should Biomedical Publishing Be “Opened Up”? Toward a Values-Based Peer-Review Process. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 8 (3):267-280.
Jacquineau Azetsop & Tisha Joy (2011). Epistemological and Ethical Assessment of Obesity Bias in Industrialized Countries. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 6 (1):16-.
Jacquineau Azétsop & Tisha R. Joy (2011). Epistemological and Ethical Assessment of Obesity Bias in Industrialized Countries. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 6 (1):16-.
Added to index2011-03-11
Total downloads7 ( #292,059 of 1,725,575 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #349,436 of 1,725,575 )
How can I increase my downloads?