Cargando…

Objectivity for the research worker

In the last decade, many problematic cases of scientific conduct have been diagnosed; some of which involve outright fraud (e.g., Stapel, 2012) others are more subtle (e.g., supposed evidence of extrasensory perception; Bem, 2011). These and similar problems can be interpreted as caused by lack of s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van Dongen, Noah, Sikorski, Michał
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8550135/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34721744
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13194-021-00400-6
_version_ 1784590897604722688
author van Dongen, Noah
Sikorski, Michał
author_facet van Dongen, Noah
Sikorski, Michał
author_sort van Dongen, Noah
collection PubMed
description In the last decade, many problematic cases of scientific conduct have been diagnosed; some of which involve outright fraud (e.g., Stapel, 2012) others are more subtle (e.g., supposed evidence of extrasensory perception; Bem, 2011). These and similar problems can be interpreted as caused by lack of scientific objectivity. The current philosophical theories of objectivity do not provide scientists with conceptualizations that can be effectively put into practice in remedying these issues. We propose a novel way of thinking about objectivity for individual scientists; a negative and dynamic approach.We provide a philosophical conceptualization of objectivity that is informed by empirical research. In particular, it is our intention to take the first steps in providing an empirically and methodologically informed inventory of factors that impair the scientific practice. The inventory will be compiled into a negative conceptualization (i.e., what is not objective), which could in principle be used by individual scientists to assess (deviations from) objectivity of scientific practice. We propose a preliminary outline of a usable and testable instrument for indicating the objectivity of scientific practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8550135
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85501352021-10-29 Objectivity for the research worker van Dongen, Noah Sikorski, Michał Eur J Philos Sci Paper in General Philosophy of Science In the last decade, many problematic cases of scientific conduct have been diagnosed; some of which involve outright fraud (e.g., Stapel, 2012) others are more subtle (e.g., supposed evidence of extrasensory perception; Bem, 2011). These and similar problems can be interpreted as caused by lack of scientific objectivity. The current philosophical theories of objectivity do not provide scientists with conceptualizations that can be effectively put into practice in remedying these issues. We propose a novel way of thinking about objectivity for individual scientists; a negative and dynamic approach.We provide a philosophical conceptualization of objectivity that is informed by empirical research. In particular, it is our intention to take the first steps in providing an empirically and methodologically informed inventory of factors that impair the scientific practice. The inventory will be compiled into a negative conceptualization (i.e., what is not objective), which could in principle be used by individual scientists to assess (deviations from) objectivity of scientific practice. We propose a preliminary outline of a usable and testable instrument for indicating the objectivity of scientific practice. Springer Netherlands 2021-09-08 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8550135/ /pubmed/34721744 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13194-021-00400-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Paper in General Philosophy of Science
van Dongen, Noah
Sikorski, Michał
Objectivity for the research worker
title Objectivity for the research worker
title_full Objectivity for the research worker
title_fullStr Objectivity for the research worker
title_full_unstemmed Objectivity for the research worker
title_short Objectivity for the research worker
title_sort objectivity for the research worker
topic Paper in General Philosophy of Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8550135/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34721744
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13194-021-00400-6
work_keys_str_mv AT vandongennoah objectivityfortheresearchworker
AT sikorskimichał objectivityfortheresearchworker