Collaboration in Science

Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 57 (4):112-116 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The article provides a brief overview of the philosophical and methodological problems of modern collaborative research. Collaborations – distributed organizations with variable membership, consisting of a large number (sometimes several thousand) of participants – are common in experimental high-energy physics studying microcosm objects, elementary particles arising in collisions of beams of accelerated particles and nuclei at collider accelerators, as well as in biomedicine and climatology. The central issues are authorship, epistemic ownership and dependence in collaborations, the division of epistemic labor in interdisciplinary research, as well as related issues of scientific organization – peer review and distribution of credit in a team. Formally, the author, conceived as a list of persons appearing as authors of a collaborative scientific work, seems to be defined by the specific participants of the collaboration core, i.e., is a construct. However, the question can also be understood as “What does it mean to be the author of a scientific work?”, and then the answer becomes much less certain. Authorship of thousand-people articles is justified psychologically as the desire for regular performance of a ritual, which allows demonstrating joint belonging to a certain tradition, such as a long experiment, affiliation with the “workshop” of scientists studying phenomena of the microworld, which allows scientists, despite of their daily preoccupation with technical routines, to distinguish themselves from non-epistemic communities (engineers, technicians). However, specific rules that determine exactly who and why are worthy of being included as co-authors have been undergoing changes in recent years. In addition to theoretical significance, many of the problems discussed are related to actual practical issues of scientometry and the organization of scientific research, and therefore approaches to their solution can be directly embodied in scientific policy.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,593

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

The Epistemic Norms of Intra-Scientific Testimony.Mikkel Gerken - 2015 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 45 (6):568-595.
Values in Science: The Case of Scientific Collaboration.Kristina Rolin - 2015 - Philosophy of Science 82 (2):157-177.
Collaborative knowledge.Paul Thagard - 1997 - Noûs 31 (2):242-261.
Scientific authorship in the age of collaborative research.K. Brad Wray - 2006 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 37 (3):505-514.
The epistemic significance of collaborative research.K. Brad Wray - 2002 - Philosophy of Science 69 (1):150-168.
On Some Prospects of the Russian Philosophy of Natural Sciences.Boris I. Pruzhinin - 2020 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 57 (4):107-111.
Collaborative healthcare research: Some ethical considerations.Mohsin Raza - 2005 - Science and Engineering Ethics 11 (2):177-186.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-12-22

Downloads
14 (#846,545)

6 months
4 (#319,344)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references