Self-correction in science: The diagnostic and integrative motives for replication, 2021, Peterson and Panofsky

Discussion in 'Research methodology news and research' started by Andy, Mar 28, 2021.

  1. Andy

    Andy Committee Member

    Messages:
    23,034
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    Might be interesting, sadly it's paywalled.

    A series of failed replications and frauds have raised questions regarding self-correction in science. Metascientific activists have advocated policies that incentivize replications and make them more diagnostically potent. We argue that current debates, as well as research in science and technology studies, have paid little heed to a key dimension of replication practice. Although it sometimes serves a diagnostic function, replication is commonly motivated by a practical desire to extend research interests. The resulting replication, which we label ‘integrative’, is characterized by a pragmatic flexibility toward protocols. The goal is to appropriate what is useful, not test for truth. Within many experimental cultures, however, integrative replications can produce replications of ambiguous diagnostic power. Based on interviews with 60 members of the Board of Reviewing Editors for the journal Science, we show how the interplay between the diagnostic and integrative motives for replication differs between fields and produces different cultures of replication. We offer six theses that aim to put science and technology studies and science activism into dialog to show why effective reforms will need to confront issues of disciplinary difference.

    Paywall, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/03063127211005551
     
    Hutan, Michelle, alktipping and 6 others like this.

Share This Page