Abstract
Computer simulation of an epistemic landscape model, modified to include explicit representation of a centralized funding body, show the method of funding allocation has significant effects on communal trade-off between exploration and exploitation, with consequences for the community’s ability to generate significant truths. The results show this effect is contextual, and depends on the size of the landscape being explored, with funding that includes explicit random allocation performing significantly better than peer-review on large landscapes. The paper proposes a way of incorporating external institutional factors in formal social epistemology, and offers a way of bringing such investigations to bear on current research policy questions.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1093/bjps/axx059
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 70,307
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas Samuel Kuhn - 1962 - Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas S. Kuhn - 1962 - University of Chicago Press.
Science, Truth, and Democracy.Philip Kitcher - 2001 - Oxford University Press.
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.David Bohm - 1964 - Philosophical Quarterly 14 (57):377-379.

View all 25 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Is Peer Review a Good Idea?Remco Heesen & Liam Kofi Bright - 2021 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 72 (3):635-663.
The Credit Incentive to Be a Maverick.Remco Heesen - 2019 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 76:5-12.
A Mid-Level Approach to Modeling Scientific Communities.Audrey Harnagel - 2019 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 76:49-59.
Mavericks and Lotteries.Shahar Avin - 2019 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 76:13-23.

View all 17 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Perils of Centralized Research Funding Systems.Alexander Berezin - 1998 - Knowledge, Technology & Policy 11 (3):5-26.
Why Do Funding Agencies Favor Hypothesis Testing?Chris Haufe - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 44 (3):363-374.
Funding, Objectivity and the Socialization of Medical Research.James Robert Brown - 2002 - Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (3):295--308.
Ethical Issues in Funding Orphan Drug Research and Development.C. A. Gericke - 2005 - Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (3):164-168.
Dirty Money.Cynthia Jones - 2014 - Journal of Academic Ethics 12 (3):191-207.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-11-30

Total views
29 ( #394,724 of 2,507,878 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #169,107 of 2,507,878 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes