Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 160 |
| Number of pages | 26 |
| Journal | SYNTHESE |
| Volume | 203 |
| Issue number | 5 |
| Publication status | Published - 6 May 2024 |
Abstract
The elimination of gatekeepers for scientific publication has been represented as a means to promote the core moral values of open science, including democratic decision-making and inclusiveness. I argue that this framing ignores the reality that gatekeeping is a way of structuring prestige hierarchies, and that without gatekeeping, some other structuring would be needed: the flattening of prestige hierarchies is not possible given scientists’ need to navigate information overload. I consider two potential restructurings of prestige hierarchies, one based on citation count and the other on search algorithm rank. These are shown to simply reintroduce status biases and hierarchies in ways that either do not further the open science ideals of democracy and inclusiveness, or else involve some de facto gatekeeping. Gatekeeper elimination should not be thought of as an intrinsic part of the open science movement. In fact, insofar as gatekeeping is guided by professional ideals of impartiality and diligence, it can be thought of as an ally of open science values.
Keywords
- Bibliometrics, Human nature, Open science, Peer review, Search algorithms, Social status, Transparency
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Arts and Humanities(all)
- Philosophy
- Social Sciences(all)
- General Social Sciences
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
In: SYNTHESE, Vol. 203, No. 5, 160, 06.05.2024.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Gatekeeping should be conserved in the open science era
AU - Desmond, Hugh
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © The Author(s) 2024.
PY - 2024/5/6
Y1 - 2024/5/6
N2 - The elimination of gatekeepers for scientific publication has been represented as a means to promote the core moral values of open science, including democratic decision-making and inclusiveness. I argue that this framing ignores the reality that gatekeeping is a way of structuring prestige hierarchies, and that without gatekeeping, some other structuring would be needed: the flattening of prestige hierarchies is not possible given scientists’ need to navigate information overload. I consider two potential restructurings of prestige hierarchies, one based on citation count and the other on search algorithm rank. These are shown to simply reintroduce status biases and hierarchies in ways that either do not further the open science ideals of democracy and inclusiveness, or else involve some de facto gatekeeping. Gatekeeper elimination should not be thought of as an intrinsic part of the open science movement. In fact, insofar as gatekeeping is guided by professional ideals of impartiality and diligence, it can be thought of as an ally of open science values.
AB - The elimination of gatekeepers for scientific publication has been represented as a means to promote the core moral values of open science, including democratic decision-making and inclusiveness. I argue that this framing ignores the reality that gatekeeping is a way of structuring prestige hierarchies, and that without gatekeeping, some other structuring would be needed: the flattening of prestige hierarchies is not possible given scientists’ need to navigate information overload. I consider two potential restructurings of prestige hierarchies, one based on citation count and the other on search algorithm rank. These are shown to simply reintroduce status biases and hierarchies in ways that either do not further the open science ideals of democracy and inclusiveness, or else involve some de facto gatekeeping. Gatekeeper elimination should not be thought of as an intrinsic part of the open science movement. In fact, insofar as gatekeeping is guided by professional ideals of impartiality and diligence, it can be thought of as an ally of open science values.
KW - Bibliometrics
KW - Human nature
KW - Open science
KW - Peer review
KW - Search algorithms
KW - Social status
KW - Transparency
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85192179133&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11229-024-04559-2
DO - 10.1007/s11229-024-04559-2
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85192179133
VL - 203
JO - SYNTHESE
JF - SYNTHESE
SN - 0039-7857
IS - 5
M1 - 160
ER -