Epistemological сonsideration of the status of scientific publication

Authors

  • Лада Владимировна Шиповалова St. Petersburg State University, 7–9, Universitetskaya nab., St. Petersburg, 199034, Russian Federation
  • Светлана Александровна Душина S. I. Vavilov Institute for the History of Science and Technology, St. Petersburg Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, 5, Universitetskaya nab., St. Petersburg, 199034, Russian Federation

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu17.2018.203

Abstract

This paper focuses on the scientific activity represented through an organized network of pub-lications. On the one hand, scientific publication refers to the autonomy of science commu-nity. On the other hand, research management takes it as an instrument of control and evalua-tion of science. The article aims at the determination of origin and resolving the contradiction associated with such ambiguity of scientific publication. The investigation proceeds from the conceptual grounds of modern epistemology and philosophy of science studying the crisis of scientific representation. The authors 1) explicate the concept of representation and its medial status, i.e. mediation between «who» represents and «what» is represented; 2) clarify the con-ditions under which the crisis of representation occurs: its medial status fails; representation becomes an obstacle to understanding the latter; 3) describe the possibility of overcoming the crisis, which consists in shifting attention to the conditions of producing representation. The medial status of representation of the scientific activity through publication has three levels: inter-scientific, reflexive and outer-scientific. Particular attention is paid to the third level. At this level, the publication activity serves as a medium between scientists and research manag-ers. The authors of this paper diagnose the transformation of the publication from a medium of fruitful interaction between all actors interested in science to a resource of efficiency. That transformation creates obstacles for the development of science. The representation of science by means of scientometrics for managers surrogates the scientific activity itself. In the last part of the paper, specific strategies are described, which aim at restoring the medial status of rep-resentation of the scientific publication and determine the effective science policy.

Keywords:

scientific community, evaluation of science, research management, a crisis of representation, science policy

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
 

References

Литература

Биргер П. А., Дмитриев И. С., Куприянов В. А. и др. Наука: испытание эффективностью. СПб.: Фонд развития конфликтологии, 2016. 212 с.

Алейников А. В., Осипов И. Д., Пинкевич А. Г. Конфликты бизнеса и власти в России: концепту-альные рамки исследования // Конфликтология. 2014. № 5. С. 73–77.

Coopman C., Vertesi J., Lynch M., S. Woolgar S. Introduction: Representation in Scientific Practice Revisited // Coopman C.,Vertesi J., Lynch M., S. Woolgar S. (eds.) Representation in Scientific Practice Re-visited. Cambridge Mass. & London: The MIT Press, 2014. P. 1–12.

Marcus G. E., Fischer M. M. I. Anthropology as Cultural Critique: An Experimental Moment in the Human Sciences. Chicago; London: University of Chicago Press, 1986. 228 p.

Rorty R. Truth and Progress, Philosophical Papers. Vol. 3. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998. 363 p.

Руденко Н. И. «Кризис репрезентации» в социальных науках на рубеже 1980–1990-х гг.: крити-ка процесса познания и социологических нарративов // Эпистемология и философия науки. 2017. Т. 51, № 1. С. 207–221.

Denzin N. The Poststructural Crisis in the Social Sciences: Learning from James Joyce // Brown R. H.(ed.) Postmodern Representations. Truth, Power, And Mimesis in the Human Sciences and Public Culture. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press, 1995. P. 38–60.

Vannini Ph (ed.) Non-Representational Methodologies. Re-Envisioning Research. New York; Lon-don: Routledge, 2015. 194 p.

Daston L. Beyond Representation // Coopman C. Vertesi J., Lynch M., S. Woolgar S. (eds.) Representa-tion in Scientific Practice Revisited. Cambridge Mass, London: The MIT Press, 2014. P. 319–322.

Latour B. The more Manipulations, The Better // Coopmans C., Vertesi J., Lynch M., Woolgar S.(eds.). Representation in Scientific Practice Revisited. Cambridge Mass.; London: The MIT Press, 2014.P. 347–350.

Куприянов В. А., Шиповалова Л. В.Кризис репрезентаций. Как возможен успешный исход // Эпистемология и философия науки. 2017. Т. 51, № 1. С. 171–188.

Garfield E. Has Scientific Communication Changed in 300 Years? // Current Contents. 1980. N 8. P. 5–11.

rice D. J. de S. Networks of Scientific Papers: The Pattern of Bibliographic References Indicates the Nature of the Scientific Research Front // Science. 1965. Vol. 149, is. 3685. P. 510–515.

Nederhof A. J. Bibliometric Monitoring of Research Performance in the Social Sciences and the Humanities: A Review // Scientometrics. 2006. Vol. 66, is. 1. P. 81–100.

Bloor D. Knowledge and Social Imagery. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1976. 156 p.

Bourdie P. Science of Science and Reflexivity. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2004. 144 p.

arfield E. From the Science of Science to Scientometrics Visualizing the History of Science with HistCite Software // Journal of Informetrics. 2009. № 3. P. 173–179.

ingers J. Leydesdorff L. A Review of Theory and Practice in Scientometrics // European Journal of Operational Research. 2015. Vol. 246, N 1. P. 1–19.

Холтон Дж. Тематический анализ науки. М.: Прогресс, 1981. 384 с.

Бурдье П. Клиническая социология поля науки // Социоанализ Пьера Бурдье. М.: Институт экспериментальной социологии. СПб.: Алетейя, 2001. С. 49–96.

Bornmann L., Leydesdorff L. Scientometrics in a Changing Research Landscape // EMBO reports. 2014. Vol. 15, N 12. P. 1228–1232.

Elliott D. B. Salami slicing and the SPU: Publish or Perish? // Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics. 2013, N 33 (6). P. 625–626.

ишер М. Капиталистический реализм. Альтернативы нет? М.: Ультра. Культура 2.0, 2010. 144 с.

Марджинсон С. Российские наука и высшее образование в условиях глобализации // Вопросы образования. 2014. №4. С. 8–35.

Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU). URL: http://www.shanghairanking.com (дата обращения: 20.09.2017).

Парфенова С. Л., Гришакина, Е. Г. Богатов В. В. Анализ публикационной активности россий-ских исследователей в научных журналах, индексируемых в международных базах Web of Science // Наука. Образование. Инновации. 2017. № 1. С. 137–148.

Нан Лин, Гарвей У. Д., Нельсон К. Е. Исследование коммуникационной структуры науки // Коммуникация в современной науке. Сборник переводов / ред. Э. М. Мирский, В. Н. Садовский. М.: Прогресс, 1976. С. 291–335.

Hicks D., Wouters P., Waltman L., Rijcke S., Rafols I. Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for Re-search Metrics // Nature. 2015. Vol. 520, N 7548. P. 429–431.

Priem J., Taraborelli P., Groth P., Neylon C. Altmetrics: A manifesto. 2010. URL: http://altmetrics.org/manifesto (дата обращения: 20.06. 2017).

Watermeyer R., Olssen M. ‘Excellence’ and Exclusion: The Individual Costs of Institutional Competi-tiveness // Minerva. 2016. Vol. 54, is. 2. P. 201–218.

Bianco M., Gras N., Sutz J. Academic Evaluation: Universal Instrument? Tool for Development? // Minerva. 2016. Vol. 54, is. 4. P. 399–421.

Hollingsworth J. R., Hollingsworth E. J. Major Discoveries, Creativity, and the Dynamics of Science. Vienna: Remaprint Wien, 2011. 145 p.

Heinze T., Shapira P., Rogers J. D., Senker J. M. Organizational and Institutional Influences on Cre-ativity in Scientific Research // Research Policy. 2009. N 38. P. 610–623.

Гриффит Б. Ч., Маллинз Н Ч. Социальные группировки в развитии науки // Коммуникация в современной науке. Сборник переводов / ред. Э. М. Мирский, В. Н. Садовский. М.: Прогресс, 1976. С. 131–155.

Hemlin S., Rasmussen S. B. The Shift in Academic Quality Control // Science, Technology, & Human Values. 2006. Vol. 31, is. 2. P. 173–198.

References

Birger P. A., Dmitriev I. S., Kupriianov V. A. et al. Nauka: ispytanie effektivnost’iu [Science: Challenge by Effectiveness]. St. Petersburg, Fond razvitiia konfliktologii Publ., 2016. 212 p. (In Russian)

Aleinikov A. V., Osipov I. D., Pinkevich A. G. Konflikty biznesa i vlasti v Rossii: kontseptual’nye ramki issledovaniia [Conflicts of Business and Power in Russia: Conseptual Frames of Research]. Konfliktologiia, 2014, no. 5, pp. 73–77. (In Russian)

Coopman C., Vertesi J., Lynch M., S. Woolgar S. Introduction: Representation in Scientific Practice Revisited. Representation in Scientific Practice Revisited. Eds. C. Coopmans, J. Vertesi, M. Lynch, S. Woolgar. Cambridge, Mass., London, The MIT Press, 2014, pp. 1–12.

Marcus G. E., Fischer M. M. I. Anthropology as Cultural Critique: An Experimental Moment in the Human Sciences. Chicago and London, University of Chicago Press, 1986. 228 p.

Rorty R. Truth and Progress, Philosophical Papers. Vol. 3. New York, Cambridge University Press, 1998. 363 p.

Rudenko N. I. «Krizis reprezentatsii» v sotsial’nykh naukakh na rubezhe 1980–1990-kh gg.: kritika protsessa poznaniia i sotsiologicheskikh narrativov [“The Crisis of Representation” in the Social Sciences in the Middle of 1980–1990 s: Critics of the Process of Cognition and Sociological Narratives]. Epistemologiia i filosofiia nauki, 2017, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 206–220. (In Russian)

Denzin N. The Poststructural Crisis in the Social Sciences: Learning from James Joyce. Ed. by R. H. Brown. Postmodern Representations. Truth, Power, and Mimesis in the Human Sciences and Public Culture. Champaign, IL, University of Illinois Press, 1995, pp. 38–60.

Vannini Ph. (ed.) Non-Representational Methodologies. Re-envisioning Research. New York, London, Routledge, 2015. 194 p.

Daston L. Beyond Representation. Representation in Scientific Practice Revisited. Eds C. Coopmans, J. Vertesi, M. Lynch, S. Woolgar. Cambridge Mass. & London: The MIT Press, 2014, pp. 319–322.

Latour B. The more Manipulations, The Better. Representation in Scientific Practice Revisited. Eds C. Coopmans, J. Vertesi, M. Lynch, S. Woolgar. Cambridge, Mass., London, The MIT Press, 2014, pp. 347–350.

Kuprijanov V. A., Shipovalova L. V. Krizis reprezentatsii. Kak vozmozhen uspeshnyi iskhod [The Crisis of Representations. How is a Successful Outcome Possible? The Case of Scientometrics]. Epistemologiia i filosofiia nauki, 2017, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 171–188. (In Russian)

Garfield E. Has scientific communication changed in 300 years? Current Contents. 1980, no. 8, pp. 5–11.

Price D. J. de S. Networks of scientific papers: The pattern of bibliographic references indicates the nature of the scientific research front. Science, 1965, vol. 149, no. 3685, pp. 510–515.

Nederhof A. J. -Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the Social Sciences and the Humanities: A review. Scientometrics, 2006, vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 81–100.

Bloor D. Knowledge and Social Imagery. London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1976. 156 p.

Bourdie P. Science of Science and Reflexivity. Cambridge, Polity Press, 2004. 144 p.

Garfield E. From the science of science to Scientometrics visualizing the history of science with HistCite software. Journal of Informetrics, 2009, no. 3, pp. 173–179.

Mingers J., Leydesdorff L. A Review of Theory and Practice in Scientometrics. European Journal of Operational Research, 2015, vol. 246, no. 1, pp. 1–19.

Holton J. Tematicheskii analiz nauki [Thematic Analisis in Sciense]. Moscow, Progress Publ., 1981. 384 p. (In Russian)

Bourdieu P. Klinicheskaia sotsiologiia polia nauki [Clinical sociology field of science]. Sotsioanaliz P’era Burd’e [Socioanalysis P. Bourdieu]. Moscow, Institute of Experimental Sociology; St. Petersburg, Aleteiia Publ., 2001, pp. 49–96. (In Russian)

Bornmann L., Leydesdorff L. Scientometrics in a changing research landscape. EMBO reports, 2014, vol. 15, no. 12, pp. 1228–1232.

Elliott D. B. Salami slicing and the SPU: Publish or Perish? Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 2013, no. 33 (6), pp. 625–626.

Fisher M. Kapitalisticheskii realizm. Al’ternativy net? [Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative?] Moscow, Ul’tra Kul’tura 2.0, Publ., 2010. 144 p. (In Russian)

Marginson S. Rossiiskie nauka i vysshee obrazovanie v usloviiakh globalizatsii [Russian Science and Higher Education in a More Global Era]. Voprosy obrazovaniia, 2014, no. 4, pp. 8–35. (In Russian)

Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU). Available at: http://www.shanghairanking. com/ (accessed: 20.06.2017).

Parfenova S. L., Grishakina, E. G. Bogatov V. V. Analiz publikatsionnoi aktivnosti rossiiskikh issledovatelei v nauchnykh zhurnalakh, indeksiruemykh v mezhdunarodnykh bazakh Web of Science [Analysis of Publication Activity of Russian Researchersin Journals Indexed in Web of Science Database]. Nauka. Obrazovanie. Innovatsii, 2017, no. 1 (23), pp. 137–148. (In Russian)

Nan Lin, Garvey W., Nelson C. E. Issledovanie kommunikatsionnoi struktury nauki [A Study of the Communication Structure of Science]. Kommunikatsiia v sovremennoi nauke [Communication in modern science]. Eds E. M. Mirskiy, V. N. Sadovskiy. Moscow, Progress Publ., 1976, pp. 291–335. (In Russian)

Hicks D., Wouters P., Waltman L., Rijcke S., Rafols I. Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature, 2015, vol. 520, no. 7548, pp. 429–431.

Priem J., Taraborelli P., Groth P., Neylon C. Altmetrics: A manifesto. 2010. Available at: http://altmetrics.org/manifesto (accessed: 20 July 2017).

Watermeyer R., Olssen M. ‘Excellence’ and Exclusion: The Individual Costs of Institutional Competitiveness. Minerva, 2016, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 201–218.

Bianco M., Gras N. & Sutz J. Academic Evaluation: Universal Instrument? Tool for Development?Minerva, 2016, vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 399–421.

Hollingsworth J. R, Hollingsworth E. J. Major Discoveries, Creativity, and the Dynamics of Science. Vienna, Remaprint Wien, 2011. 145 p.

Heinze T., Shapira P., Rogers J. D., Senker J .M. Organizational and Institutional Influences on Creativity in Scientific Research. Research Policy, 2009, no. 38, pp. 610–623.

Griffith B. C., Mullins N. C. Sotsial’nye gruppirovki v razvitii nauki [Coherent Social Groups in Scientific Change]. Kommunikatsiia v sovremennoi nauke [Communication in Modern Science]. Eds E. M. Mirskiy, V. N. Sadovskiy. Moscow, Progress, 1976, pp. 131–155 (In Russian)

Hemlin S., Rasmussen S. B. The Shift in Academic Quality Control. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 2006, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 173–198.

Downloads

Published

2018-09-27

How to Cite

Шиповалова, Л. В., & Душина, С. А. (2018). Epistemological сonsideration of the status of scientific publication. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies, 34(2), 165–176. https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu17.2018.203

Issue

Vol. 34 No. 2 (2018): Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies

Section

Philosophy

License

Articles of "Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies" are open access distributed under the terms of the License Agreement with Saint Petersburg State University, which permits to the authors unrestricted distribution and self-archiving free of charge.