Gatekeeping should be conserved in the open science era

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer review

Authors

  • Hugh Desmond

Research Organisations

External Research Organisations

  • University of Antwerp (UAntwerpen)
View graph of relations

Details

Original languageEnglish
Article number160
Number of pages26
JournalSYNTHESE
Volume203
Issue number5
Publication statusPublished - 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

Cite this

Gatekeeping should be conserved in the open science era. / Desmond, Hugh.
In: SYNTHESE, Vol. 203, No. 5, 160, 06.05.2024.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer review

Desmond H. Gatekeeping should be conserved in the open science era. SYNTHESE. 2024 May 6;203(5):160. doi: 10.1007/s11229-024-04559-2
Desmond, Hugh. / Gatekeeping should be conserved in the open science era. In: SYNTHESE. 2024 ; Vol. 203, No. 5.
Download
@article{47211b7501a94afb93a35e4740602372,
title = "Gatekeeping should be conserved in the open science era",
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{\textquoteright} 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",
author = "Hugh Desmond",
note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} The Author(s) 2024.",
year = "2024",
month = may,
day = "6",
doi = "10.1007/s11229-024-04559-2",
language = "English",
volume = "203",
journal = "SYNTHESE",
issn = "0039-7857",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "5",

}

Download

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 -