Journal of Philosophy 115 (12):661-674 (2018)

Remco Heesen
University of Western Australia
Recent philosophical work has praised the reward structure of science, while recent empirical work has shown that many scientific results may not be reproducible. I argue that the reward structure of science incentivizes scientists to focus on speed and impact at the expense of the reproducibility of their work, thus contributing to the so-called reproducibility crisis. I use a rational choice model to identify a set of sufficient conditions for this problem to arise, and I argue that these conditions plausibly apply to a wide range of research situations. Currently proposed solutions will not fully address this problem. Philosophical commentators should temper their optimism about the reward structure of science.
Keywords Philosophy of science  Formal epistemology  Social epistemology  Reproducibility  Pressure to publish
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0022-362X
DOI 10.5840/jphil20181151239
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Accuracy and the Laws of Credence.Richard Pettigrew - 2016 - Oxford University Press UK.
Epistemic Rationality as Instrumental Rationality: A Critique.Thomas Kelly - 2003 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 66 (3):612–640.

View all 23 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.
Self-Correction in Science: Meta-Analysis, Bias and Social Structure.Justin P. Bruner & Bennett Holman - 2019 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 78:93-97.

View all 20 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Opinion: Reproducibility Failures Are Essential to Scientific Inquiry.A. David Redish, Erich Kummerfeld, Rebecca Morris & Alan Love - 2018 - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115 (20):5042-5046.
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.
Who Should Do Replication Labor?Felipe Romero - 2018 - Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science 1 (4):516-537.
The Influence of James B. Conant on Kuhn’s Structure of Scientific Revolutions.K. Brad Wray - 2016 - Hopos: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 6 (1):1-23.


Added to PP index

Total views
1,583 ( #2,577 of 2,448,407 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
123 ( #4,554 of 2,448,407 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes