Suppr超能文献

扰乱默顿:开放科学实践与默顿价值观的交叉点。

Messing with Merton: The intersection between open science practices and Mertonian values.

机构信息

Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

Dimmons Research Group, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain.

出版信息

Account Res. 2024 Jul;31(5):428-455. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2022.2141625. Epub 2022 Nov 6.

Abstract

Although adherence to Mertonian values of science (i.e., communism, universalism, organized skepticism, disinterestedness) is desired and promoted in academia, such adherence can cause friction with the normative structures and practices of Open Science. Mertonian values and Open Science practices aim to improve the conduct and communication of research and are promoted by institutional actors. However, Mertonian values remain mostly idealistic and contextualized in local and disciplinary cultures and Open Science practices rely heavily on third-party resources and technology that are not equally accessible to all parties. Furthermore, although still popular, Mertonian values were developed in a different institutional and political context. In this article, we argue that new normative structures for science need to look beyond nostalgia and consider aspirations and outcomes of Open Science practices. To contribute to such a vision, we explore the intersection of several Open Science practices with Mertonian values to flesh out challenges involved in upholding these values. We demonstrate that this intersection becomes complicated when the interests of numerous groups collide and contrast. Acknowledging and exploring such tensions informs our understanding of researchers' behavior and supports efforts that seek to improve researchers' interactions with other normative structures such as research ethics and integrity frameworks.

摘要

尽管学术界推崇并提倡默顿科学价值观(即共产主义、普遍性、有组织的怀疑主义、无私利性),但这种遵从可能会与开放科学的规范结构和实践产生摩擦。默顿科学价值观和开放科学实践旨在改进研究的实施和交流,并得到制度参与者的推动。然而,默顿科学价值观在很大程度上仍然是理想化的,并且在地方和学科文化中具体化,而开放科学实践严重依赖于并非所有各方都能平等获得的第三方资源和技术。此外,尽管默顿科学价值观仍然很流行,但它们是在不同的制度和政治背景下发展起来的。在本文中,我们认为,新的科学规范结构需要超越怀旧情绪,考虑开放科学实践的愿望和结果。为了为这样的愿景做出贡献,我们探讨了几种开放科学实践与默顿科学价值观的交叉点,以阐明坚持这些价值观所涉及的挑战。我们表明,当众多群体的利益发生冲突和对比时,这种交叉点变得复杂起来。承认和探索这种紧张关系有助于我们理解研究人员的行为,并支持旨在改善研究人员与其他规范结构(如研究伦理和诚信框架)相互作用的努力。

相似文献

1
Messing with Merton: The intersection between open science practices and Mertonian values.
Account Res. 2024 Jul;31(5):428-455. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2022.2141625. Epub 2022 Nov 6.
2
Interventions to prevent misconduct and promote integrity in research and publication.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Apr 4;4(4):MR000038. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000038.pub2.
3
Measures implemented in the school setting to contain the COVID-19 pandemic.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Jan 17;1(1):CD015029. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD015029.
5
Stigma Management Strategies of Autistic Social Media Users.
Autism Adulthood. 2025 May 28;7(3):273-282. doi: 10.1089/aut.2023.0095. eCollection 2025 Jun.
6
Interventions for interpersonal communication about end of life care between health practitioners and affected people.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Jul 8;7(7):CD013116. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013116.pub2.
7
Guided tissue regeneration for periodontal infra-bony defects.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Apr 19(2):CD001724. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001724.pub2.
8
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Apr 19;4(4):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub4.
9
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jan 9;1(1):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub3.
10
Signs and symptoms to determine if a patient presenting in primary care or hospital outpatient settings has COVID-19.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 May 20;5(5):CD013665. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013665.pub3.

引用本文的文献

1
Special libraries, special challenges: An ethical framework for access to problematic historical medical films.
Public Serv Q. 2025 Jan-Mar;21(1). doi: 10.1080/15228959.2025.2455216. Epub 2025 Feb 2.
3
Value-aware nutrition science: building credibility through reflexivity.
Eur J Nutr. 2025 Jun 25;64(5):229. doi: 10.1007/s00394-025-03699-6.
4
The ethics of using artificial intelligence in scientific research: new guidance needed for a new tool.
AI Ethics. 2025 Apr;5(2):1499-1521. doi: 10.1007/s43681-024-00493-8. Epub 2024 May 27.
5
Open Science at the generative AI turn: An exploratory analysis of challenges and opportunities.
Quant Sci Stud. 2025;6:22-45. doi: 10.1162/qss_a_00337. Epub 2025 Jan 27.
6
Endorsement of scientific norms among non-scientists: The role of science news consumption, political ideology, and science field.
Public Underst Sci. 2025 Aug;34(6):752-769. doi: 10.1177/09636625251315882. Epub 2025 Feb 28.
7
Diverse sources of normativity in open science and their implications for ethical governance.
R Soc Open Sci. 2024 Jul 24;11(7):240480. doi: 10.1098/rsos.240480. eCollection 2024 Jul.

本文引用的文献

1
Promoting trust in research and researchers: How open science and research integrity are intertwined.
BMC Res Notes. 2022 Sep 20;15(1):302. doi: 10.1186/s13104-022-06169-y.
2
An Ethical Exploration of Increased Average Number of Authors Per Publication.
Sci Eng Ethics. 2022 May 23;28(3):25. doi: 10.1007/s11948-021-00352-3.
3
Dynamics of cumulative advantage and threats to equity in open science: a scoping review.
R Soc Open Sci. 2022 Jan 19;9(1):211032. doi: 10.1098/rsos.211032. eCollection 2022 Jan.
4
Open science, data sharing and solidarity: who benefits?
Hist Philos Life Sci. 2021 Nov 11;43(4):115. doi: 10.1007/s40656-021-00468-6.
5
Gender gap in journal submissions and peer review during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. A study on 2329 Elsevier journals.
PLoS One. 2021 Oct 20;16(10):e0257919. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0257919. eCollection 2021.
7
Open Science for private Interests? How the Logic of Open Science Contributes to the Commercialization of Research.
Front Res Metr Anal. 2020 Nov 10;5:588331. doi: 10.3389/frma.2020.588331. eCollection 2020.
8
The evolving role of preprints in the dissemination of COVID-19 research and their impact on the science communication landscape.
PLoS Biol. 2021 Apr 2;19(4):e3000959. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000959. eCollection 2021 Apr.
9
Peer review and gender bias: A study on 145 scholarly journals.
Sci Adv. 2021 Jan 6;7(2). doi: 10.1126/sciadv.abd0299. Print 2021 Jan.
10
How a torrent of COVID science changed research publishing - in seven charts.
Nature. 2020 Dec;588(7839):553. doi: 10.1038/d41586-020-03564-y.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验