SCIENCE@home

Evaluation of Research(ers) and its Threat to Epistemic Pluralisms

M. Viola

Published 2018 in European Journal of Analytic Philosophy

ABSTRACT

While some form of evaluation!has always been employed in science (e.g. peer review, hiring), formal systems of evaluation of research and researchers have recently come to play a more prominent role in many countries because of the adoption of new models of governance. According to such models, the quality of the output of both researchers and their institutions is measured, and issues such as eligibility for tenure or the allocation of public funding to research institutions crucially depends on the outcomes of such measures. However, concerns have been raised over the risk that such evaluation may be threatening epistemic pluralism by penalizing the existent heterodox schools of thought and discouraging the pursuit of new ones. It has been proposed that this may happen because of epistemic bias favouring mainstream research programmes. In this paper, I claim that (1) epistemic pluralism is desirable and should be preserved; (2) formal evaluation exercises may threaten epistemic pluralism because they may be affected by some form of epistemic bias; therefore, (3) to preserve epistemic pluralism, we need some strategy to actively dampen epistemic bias.

PUBLICATION RECORD

  • Publication year

    2018

  • Venue

    European Journal of Analytic Philosophy

  • Publication date

    2018-07-09

  • Fields of study

    Sociology, Political Science

  • Identifiers
    DOI 10.31820/EJAP.13.2.4
  • External record

    Open on Semantic Scholar

  • Source metadata

    Semantic Scholar

CITATION MAP

EXTRACTION MAP

CLAIMS

  • No claims are published for this paper.

CONCEPTS

  • No concepts are published for this paper.

REFERENCES

Showing 1-79 of 79 references · Page 1 of 1

CITED BY

Showing 1-6 of 6 citing papers · Page 1 of 1