Why the Reward Structure of Science Makes Reproducibility Problems Inevitable

Journal of Philosophy 115 (12):661-674 (2018)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Recent philosophical work has praised the reward structure of science, while recent empirical work has shown that many scientific results may not be reproducible. I argue that the reward structure of science incentivizes scientists to focus on speed and impact at the expense of the reproducibility of their work, thus contributing to the so-called reproducibility crisis. I use a rational choice model to identify a set of sufficient conditions for this problem to arise, and I argue that these conditions plausibly apply to a wide range of research situations. Currently proposed solutions will not fully address this problem. Philosophical commentators should temper their optimism about the reward structure of science.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2019-01-09
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Is Peer Review a Good Idea?Heesen, Remco & Bright, Liam Kofi
Jury Theorems for Peer Review.Arvan, Marcus; Bright, Liam Kofi & Heesen, Remco

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
671 ( #3,467 of 40,753 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
621 ( #418 of 40,753 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.