Minerva 57 (2):127-149 (2019)
AbstractThis paper aims to explore disciplinary variation in valuation practices by comparing the way research groups accumulate credibility across four epistemic cultures. Our analysis is based on case studies of four high-performing research groups representing very different epistemic cultures in humanities, social sciences, geosciences and mathematics. In each case we interviewed about ten researchers, analyzed relevant documents and observed a couple of meetings. In all four cases we found a cyclical process of accumulating credibility. At the same time, we found significant differences in the manifestation of the six main resources that are part of the cycle, the mechanisms of conversion between these resources, the overall structure and the average speed of the credibility cycle. The different ways in which the groups use data and produce arguments affect the whole cycle of accumulating credibility. In some cultures, journal publications are the main source of recognition, but in others one can earn significant amounts of recognition for conference contributions or service to the academic community. Moreover, the collaboration practices in the respective fields strongly influence the connection between arguments and publications. In cultures where teams of researchers collaboratively produce arguments, it is more strongly embedded in the process of writing publications. We conclude that the credibility cycle can only be used as an analytical tool to explain the behavior of researchers or research groups when taking differences across epistemic cultures into account.
Similar books and articles
Practical Applications as a Source of Credibility: A Comparison of Three Fields of Dutch Academic Chemistry. [REVIEW]Laurens K. Hessels & Harro van Lente - 2011 - Minerva 49 (2):215-240.
Epistemic Injustice in Research Evaluation: A Cultural Analysis of the Humanities and Physics in Estonia.Endla Lõhkivi, Katrin Velbaum & Jaana Eigi - 2012 - Studia Philosophica Estonica 5 (2):108-132.
Epistemic Cultures in Conflict: The Case of Astronomy and High Energy Physics.Richard Heidler - 2017 - Minerva 55 (3):249-277.
The Drawbacks of Project Funding for Epistemic Innovation: Comparing Institutional Affordances and Constraints of Different Types of Research Funding.Thomas Franssen, Wout Scholten, Laurens K. Hessels & Sarah de Rijcke - 2018 - Minerva 56 (1):11-33.
Testimonial Injustice Without Credibility Deficit.Federico Luzzi - 2016 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 5 (3):203-211.
Epistemic Harm and Virtues of Self-Evaluation.Sarah Wright - 2018 - Synthese 198 (Suppl 7):1691-1709.
The Relevance of Credibility Excess in a Proportional View of Epistemic Injustice: Differential Epistemic Authority and the Social Imaginary.José Medina - 2011 - Social Epistemology 25 (1):15-35.
Explicating Epistemic Injustice - An Analysis of Fricker's Model of Testimonial Injustice.Himanshu Parcha - 2018 - Dissertation, University of Delhi
Addressing Deficits and Injustices: The Potential Epistemic Contributions of Patients to Research.Katrina Hutchison, Wendy Rogers & Vikki A. Entwistle - 2017 - Health Care Analysis 25 (4):386-403.
On Judging Epistemic Credibility: Is Social Identity Relevant?Linda Martin Alcoff - 1999 - Philosophic Exchange 29 (1).
Epistemic Relativism and Reasonable Disagreement.Alvin I. Goldman - 2010 - In Richard Feldman & Ted A. Warfield (eds.), Disagreement. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. pp. 187-215.
Credibility Excess and the Social Imaginary in Cases of Sexual Assault.Audrey S. Yap - 2017 - Feminist Philosophy Quarterly 3 (4):1-24.
Toxic Funding? Conflicts of Interest and Their Epistemological Significance.Ben Almassi - 2017 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 34 (2):206-220.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Editorial Work and the Peer Review Economy of STS Journals.Maria Amuchastegui, Kean Birch & Wolfgang Kaltenbrunner - 2022 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 47 (4):670-697.
Epistemic Living Spaces, International Mobility, and Local Variation in Scientific Practice.Sarah R. Davies - 2020 - Minerva 58 (1):97-114.
References found in this work
Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice.Harry Collins - 1985 - Chicago, IL, USA: University of Chicago Press.
Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge.Karin Knorr-Cetina - 1999 - Harvard University Press.
The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences.Richard Whitley - 2000 - Oxford University Press.
Variants of Epistemic Capitalism: Knowledge Production and the Accumulation of Worth in Commercial Biotechnology and the Academic Life Sciences.Maximilian Fochler - 2016 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 41 (5):922-948.
Patenting Culture in Science: Reinventing the Scientific Wheel of Credibility.Andrew Webster & Kathryn Packer - 1996 - Science, Technology and Human Values 21 (4):427-453.