Philosophy of Science 84 (5):1031-1043 (2017)

Authors
Felipe Romero
University of Groningen
Abstract
The reward system of science is the priority rule. The first scientist making a new discovery is rewarded with prestige, while second runners get little or nothing. Michael Strevens, following Philip Kitcher, defends this reward system, arguing that it incentivizes an efficient division of cognitive labor. I argue that this assessment depends on strong implicit assumptions about the replicability of findings. I question these assumptions on the basis of metascientific evidence and argue that the priority rule systematically discourages replication. My analysis leads us to qualify Kitcher and Strevens’s contention that a priority-based reward system is normatively desirable for science.
Keywords Replication  Social epistemology  Priority Rule  Social structure of science  Scientific self-correction  Frequentist statistics  Extra-sensory perception
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1086/694005
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

References found in this work BETA

The Logic of Scientific Discovery.K. Popper - 1959 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 10 (37):55-57.
The Division of Cognitive Labor.Philip Kitcher - 1990 - Journal of Philosophy 87 (1):5-22.
The Role of the Priority Rule in Science.Michael Strevens - 2003 - Journal of Philosophy 100 (2):55-79.

View all 16 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.
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.
Why Replication is Overrated.Uljana Feest - 2019 - Philosophy of Science 86 (5):895-905.

View all 13 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Can the Behavioral Sciences Self-Correct? A Social Epistemic Study.Felipe Romero - 2016 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 60:55-69.
The Role of the Priority Rule in Science.Michael Strevens - 2003 - Journal of Philosophy 100 (2):55-79.
The Epistemic Norms of Intra-Scientific Testimony.Mikkel Gerken - 2015 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 45 (6):568-595.
Communism and the Incentive to Share in Science.Remco Heesen - 2017 - Philosophy of Science 84 (4):698-716.
Scientific Sharing, Communism, and the Social Contract.Michael Strevens - 2017 - In Thomas Boyer-Kassem, Conor Mayo-Wilson & Michael Weisberg (eds.), Scientific Collaboration and Collective Knowledge. Oxford University Press. pp. 3--33.
Herding and the Quest for Credit.Michael Strevens - 2013 - Journal of Economic Methodology 20 (1):19 - 34.
Rethinking Philosophy of Science Today.Evandro Agazzi - 2012 - Journal of Philosophical Research 37 (Supplement):85-101.
Some Remarks on the Division of Cognitive Labor.Marco Viola - 2015 - RT. A Journal on Research Policy and Evaluation 3.
Religious Ethics and the Scientific Study of Morality.Vincent Jeffries - 2000 - Catholic Social Science Review 5:217-231.
Kuhn's Evolutionary Social Epistemology.K. Brad Wray - 2011 - Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-05-25

Total views
572 ( #12,052 of 2,445,594 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
109 ( #5,536 of 2,445,594 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes