NORMATIVITY AND SELF-INTEREST IN SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

2008 ◽  
pp. 71-81
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Wuttke

While other scientific disciplines are currently undergoing “credibility revolutions”, also political science should also face the uncomfortable question of how much we can trust the findings that are published in the discipline’s journals and presses. Employing the concept of social dilemmas, this commentary describes analytically why scientists ¬in academia’s current incentive system work against their self-interest if they prioritize research credibility. Empirically, this article conducts a comprehensive review of meta-scientific research with a focus on quantitative political science, demonstrating that threats to the credibility of political science findings are systematic and real. Building on a framework to assess the credibility of scientific literatures, the review shows that a large fraction of the published literature makes itself inaccessible to intersubjective credibility assessments, fails tests of analytical robustness, or shows patterns of systematic deviation from true population estimates. Yet, the review also highlights the notable progress the discipline has made in recent years to secure research credibility. This commentary urges further steps toward the direction of research openness credibility. Specifically, it proposes specific institutional measures to better align individual researcher rationality with the collective good of verifiable, robust, and valid scientific results, such as dedicated verification procedures and the implementation of pre-registration and result-blind peer reviewing.


2021 ◽  
pp. 030631272110587
Author(s):  
Jérôme Baudry ◽  
Élise Tancoigne ◽  
Bruno J Strasser

Over the past two decades, a number of digital platforms have been developed with the aim of engaging citizens in scientific research projects. The success of these platforms depends in no small part on their ability to attract and retain participants, turning diffuse crowds of users into active and productive communities. This article investigates how the collectives of online citizen science are formed and governed, and identifies two ideal-types of government, either based on self-interest or on universal norms of science. Based on an ethnography of three citizen science platforms and a series of interviews with their managers, we show how different technologies – rhetorical, of the self, social, and ontological – can be diversely combined to configure these collectives. We suggest that the shift from individual projects to platforms is a defining moment for online citizen science, during which the technologies that sustain the collectives are standardized and automatized in ways that make the crowd appear to be a natural community.


1966 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 188-189
Author(s):  
T. J. Deeming

If we make a set of measurements, such as narrow-band or multicolour photo-electric measurements, which are designed to improve a scheme of classification, and in particular if they are designed to extend the number of dimensions of classification, i.e. the number of classification parameters, then some important problems of analytical procedure arise. First, it is important not to reproduce the errors of the classification scheme which we are trying to improve. Second, when trying to extend the number of dimensions of classification we have little or nothing with which to test the validity of the new parameters.Problems similar to these have occurred in other areas of scientific research (notably psychology and education) and the branch of Statistics called Multivariate Analysis has been developed to deal with them. The techniques of this subject are largely unknown to astronomers, but, if carefully applied, they should at the very least ensure that the astronomer gets the maximum amount of information out of his data and does not waste his time looking for information which is not there. More optimistically, these techniques are potentially capable of indicating the number of classification parameters necessary and giving specific formulas for computing them, as well as pinpointing those particular measurements which are most crucial for determining the classification parameters.


Author(s):  
Alexander Blaszczynski

Abstract. Background: Tensions exist with various stakeholders facing competing interests in providing legal land-based and online regulated gambling products. Threats to revenue/taxation occur in response to harm minimisation and responsible gambling policies. Setting aside the concept of total prohibition, the objectives of responsible gambling are to encourage and/or restrict an individual’s gambling expenditure in terms of money and time to personally affordable limits. Stakeholder responsibilities: Governments craft the gambling environment through legislation, monitor compliance with regulatory requirements, and receive taxation revenue as a proportion of expenditure. Industry operators on the other hand, compete across market sectors through marketing and advertising, and through the development of commercially innovative products, reaping substantial financial rewards. Concurrently, governments are driven to respond to community pressures to minimize the range of negative gambling-related social, personal and economic harms and costs. Industry operators are exposed to the same pressures but additionally overlaid with the self-interest of avoiding the imposition of more stringent restrictive policies. Cooperation of stakeholders: The resulting tension between taxation revenue and profit making, harm minimization, and social impacts creates a climate of conflict between all involved parties. Data-driven policies become compromised by unsubstantiated claims of, and counter claims against, the nature and extent of gambling-related harms, effectiveness of policy strategies, with allegations of bias and influence associated with researchers supported by industry and government research funding sources. Conclusion: To effectively advance policies, it is argued that it is imperative that all parties collaborate in a cooperative manner to achieve the objectives of responsible gambling and harm minimization. This extends to and includes more transparent funding for researchers from both government and industry. Continued reliance on data collected from analogue populations or volunteers participating in simulated gambling tasks will not provide data capable of valid and reliable extrapolation to real gamblers in real venues risking their own funds. Failure to adhere to principles of corporate responsibility and consumer protection by both governments and industry will challenge the social licence to offer gambling products. Appropriate and transparent safeguards learnt from the tobacco and alcohol field, it is argued, can guide the conduct of gambling research.


2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 737-750 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Gess ◽  
Christoph Geiger ◽  
Matthias Ziegler

Abstract. Although the development of research competency is an important goal of higher education in social sciences, instruments to measure this outcome often depend on the students’ self-ratings. To provide empirical evidence for the utility of a newly developed instrument for the objective measurement of social-scientific research competency, two validation studies across two independent samples were conducted. Study 1 ( n = 675) provided evidence for unidimensionality, expected differences in test scores between differently advanced groups of students as well as incremental validities over and above self-perceived research self-efficacy. In Study 2 ( n = 82) it was demonstrated that the competency measured indeed is social-scientific and relations to facets of fluid and crystallized intelligence were analyzed. Overall, the results indicate that the test scores reflected a trainable, social-scientific, knowledge-related construct relevant to research performance. These are promising results for the application of the instrument in the evaluation of research education courses in higher education.


1998 ◽  
Vol 43 (7) ◽  
pp. 481-482
Author(s):  
Graham L. Staines
Keyword(s):  

1978 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 356-358
Author(s):  
ALCINE POTTS LUKENBACH
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Lisa Towne ◽  
◽  
Lauress L. Wise ◽  
Tina M. Winters

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document