Knowledge Diffusion and Morality: Why do we Freely Share Valuable Information with Strangers?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles Ayoubi ◽  
Boris Thurm
Keyword(s):  
Financial Incentives ◽  
Recent Literature ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
Social Dilemma ◽  
Knowledge Diffusion ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Policy Debate ◽  
Homo Oeconomicus ◽  
Valuable Data ◽  
Science Policies

Technology enables individuals, scientists, and organizations to share valuable data and knowledge in new ways, not possible before. Scholars are divided on how this phenomenon emerges, especially among strangers. The classical homo oeconomicus type of preference does not provide an explanation for this behavior. If individuals were simply self-centered, they would choose to keep for themselves the valuable information they hold, especially in the absence of any contract or guarantee of reciprocity. In this paper, we explain why some individuals are willing to share valuable knowledge at their own cost by crafting a model with heterogeneously-moral individuals involved in a sharing social dilemma. Our model builds on the recent literature showing that moral incentives are favored by evolution theoretically and have a strong explanatory power empirically. Our analysis highlights the limit of financial incentives, and the importance of promoting a sharing culture by enhancing awareness. Shedding light on how people respond not only to financial but also moral incentives, we contribute to the ongoing policy debate on the design of efficient open science policies.

scholarly journals A landscape of open science policies research

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alejandra Manco
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Science Policy ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Open Science ◽  
General Science ◽  
Policy Framing ◽  
Spanish Speaking ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
Main Component ◽  
Science Policies

<p>Open science policies are a much-discussed issue. This literature review aims to examine the approach given to open science policy in these studies. <b></b></p> The approach given to open science in the selected works has different aspects: policy framing and its geopolitical aspects are described as an asymmetries replication and epistemic governance tool. The main geopolitical aspects of open science policies described in the literature are the relations between international, regional and national policies. There are also different components of open science covered in the literature: open data seems much discussed in the English speaking works while open access is the main component discussed in the Portuguese and Spanish speaking papers. Finally, the relation between open science policies and the general science policy is framed by highlighting the innovation and transparency that open science can bring to it.

scholarly journals Putting open science into practice: A social dilemma?

First Monday ◽  
2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kaja Scheliga ◽  
Sascha Friesike
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Community ◽  
Social Dilemma ◽  
Digital Technologies ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Best Interest ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Individual Scientist ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Opening Up

Digital technologies carry the promise of transforming science and opening up the research process. We interviewed researchers from a variety of backgrounds about their attitudes towards and experiences with openness in their research practices. We observe a considerable discrepancy between the concept of open science and scholarly reality. While many researchers support open science in theory, the individual researcher is confronted with various difficulties when putting open science into practice. We analyse the major obstacles to open science and group them into two main categories: individual obstacles and systemic obstacles. We argue that the phenomenon of open science can be seen through the prism of a social dilemma: what is in the collective best interest of the scientific community is not necessarily in the best interest of the individual scientist. We discuss the possibilities of transferring theoretical solutions to social dilemma problems to the realm of open science.

scholarly journals Framing Power: Tracing Key Discourses in Open Science Policies

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denisse Albornoz ◽  
Maggie Huang ◽  
Issra Marie Martin ◽  
Maria Mateus ◽  
Aicha Yasmine Touré ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Science ◽  
Power Tracing ◽  
Science Policies

scholarly journals Practice what you preach: Credibility-enhancing displays and the growth of open science

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gordon Kraft-Todd ◽  
David Gertler Rand
Keyword(s):  
Social Dilemmas ◽  
Social Dilemma ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Honest Signal ◽  
Incentive Schemes ◽  
Science Practices

How can individual scientists most effectively spread the adoption of open science practices? Engaging in open science practices presents a social dilemma because they are individually costly (given the current incentive schemes in academia) but collectively beneficial (due to production of higher quality and more accessible science). Mechanisms for promoting cooperation in social dilemmas typically rely on normativity—but open science practices are still comparatively rare. Further, individuals may be tempted to dishonestly “virtue signal” due to growing support for open science. We formulate a solution based on the theory of credibility-enhancing displays: advocates who are known to themselves practice the behavior they are advocating for (particularly if they are prestigious) are more effective at convincing others—specifically because their actions provide an honest signal of their belief in the behavior’s value. Thus, advocates for open science practices should find ways to engage in those practices visibly and often.

scholarly journals Implementing Open Science policies into library processes – case study of the University of Eastern Finland library

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Jarmo Saarti ◽  
Tomi Rosti ◽  
Helena Silvennoinen-Kuikka
Keyword(s):  
Open Science ◽  
The University ◽  
Eastern Finland ◽  
Science Policies

How Well Do Bibliometric Indicators Correlate With Scientific Eminence? A Comment on Simonton (2016)

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 202-203
Author(s):  
Marco Del Giudice
Keyword(s):  
Recent Literature ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
Scientific Productivity ◽  
Original Data ◽  
Regression Coefficients ◽  
H Index ◽  
Psychological Science ◽  
Original Analysis ◽  
Explained Variance ◽  
Bibliometric Index

Citing an earlier study on eminence in psychology, Simonton (2016) argued that associations between measures of scholars’ reputation, scientific productivity, and citation counts are only small to moderate [Simonton, D. K. (2016). Giving credit where credit’s due: Why it’s so hard to do in psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11, 888–892]. However, this reading is based on partial regression coefficients, which underestimate the joint explanatory power of correlated variables. A reanalysis of the original data showed that a composite bibliometric index was substantially associated with reputation (β = 0.70; 46% explained variance). Very similar results were obtained with a newly calculated h index (β = 0.67; 42% explained variance). Although both Simonton’s original analysis and the current reanalysis are inherently limited, the data suggest that the reputation of psychologists tracks their scientific contribution more closely than has been acknowledged in the recent literature.

Is homo oeconomicus an extinct species, and does it matter for EUropean integration? Attitudes towards free trade and populism

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 249-264
Author(s):  
Bogna Gawroska-Nowak
Keyword(s):  
European Integration ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Political Institutions ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
Nobel Prize Winner ◽  
Main Role ◽  
Homo Oeconomicus ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
The Eu

The latest Nobel Prize winner in economics, Richard Thaler, was rewarded 'for his contributions to behavioural economics'. Thaler and Sustain claim that there are 'nudges', not pure rationality, that drive people decision-making processes. A 2017 CEPR report reveals that economic factors do matter with regards to trust in the political institutions of the EU but they do not play the main role. Therefore, it seems quite natural to ask: what is an explanatory power of economics in grasping the recent social behaviour dynamics, including the European integration processes and actual rise of radicalism and populism? Can economics contribute to a better understanding of those issues and can it come up with some practical solutions? To answer these questions I explore both theoretical backgrounds in economics and some empirical studies. I also refer to the results of my recent research on the Polish social perception of free trade agreements. I investigate how much the limits of EUrope are related to the limits of economics.

scholarly journals A landscape of open science policies research

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alejandra Manco
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Science Policy ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Open Science ◽  
General Science ◽  
Policy Framing ◽  
Spanish Speaking ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
Main Component ◽  
Science Policies

<p>Open science policies are a much-discussed issue. This literature review aims to examine the approach given to open science policy in these studies. <b></b></p> The approach given to open science in the selected works has different aspects: policy framing and its geopolitical aspects are described as an asymmetries replication and epistemic governance tool. The main geopolitical aspects of open science policies described in the literature are the relations between international, regional and national policies. There are also different components of open science covered in the literature: open data seems much discussed in the English speaking works while open access is the main component discussed in the Portuguese and Spanish speaking papers. Finally, the relation between open science policies and the general science policy is framed by highlighting the innovation and transparency that open science can bring to it.

scholarly journals LYING IS A KIND OF DECEPTION / (MENTIRA É UM TIPO DE ENGANAÇÃO)

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (23) ◽  
pp. 42-55
Author(s):  
Felipe Castelo Branco MEDEIROS (PUCRS)
Keyword(s):  
Speech Acts ◽  
Recent Literature ◽  
Speech Act ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
Traditional View ◽  
Necessary Condition ◽  
Traditional Conception ◽  
Definition Of

Under the traditional view of lying, the concept is usually taken to be a deviant speech act with the following characteristics: (1) being insincere and (2) being done with the intention to deceive. On the recent literature, however, (2) has come under attack by a class of counter examples that purport to show that the traditional view has been misguided. In this essay, our objective is twofold, we intend to: (a) present Lackey’s defense of her take on the traditional conception; (b) present a different proposal about how to go about defending (2). This is important because, although we don’t agree with Lackey’s solution, we do agree that (2) is a necessary condition on a successful definition of lying, as evidenced by the fact that taking the deception clause out of [lying] leaves us with an overall loss of explanatory power with regards to a range of speech acts and the general ethics of communicative cooperation.

scholarly journals How Does One “Open” Science? Questions of Value in Biological Research

2016 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 280-305 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadine Levin ◽  
Sabina Leonelli
Keyword(s):  
Life Sciences ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Biological Research ◽  
Research Practice ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Semistructured Interviews ◽  
Key Questions ◽  
Science Policies

Open Science policies encourage researchers to disclose a wide range of outputs from their work, thus codifying openness as a specific set of research practices and guidelines that can be interpreted and applied consistently across disciplines and geographical settings. In this paper, we argue that this “one-size-fits-all” view of openness sidesteps key questions about the forms, implications, and goals of openness for research practice. We propose instead to interpret openness as a dynamic and highly situated mode of valuing the research process and its outputs, which encompasses economic as well as scientific, cultural, political, ethical, and social considerations. This interpretation creates a critical space for moving beyond the economic definitions of value embedded in the contemporary biosciences landscape and Open Science policies, and examining the diversity of interests and commitments that affect research practices in the life sciences. To illustrate these claims, we use three case studies that highlight the challenges surrounding decisions about how––and how best––to make things open. These cases, drawn from ethnographic engagement with Open Science debates and semistructured interviews carried out with UK-based biologists and bioinformaticians between 2013 and 2014, show how the enactment of openness reveals judgments about what constitutes a legitimate intellectual contribution, for whom, and with what implications.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document