Diversifying science: comparing the benefits of citizen science with the benefits of bringing more women into science.

I compare two different arguments for the importance of bringing new voices into science: arguments for increasing the representation of women, and arguments for the inclusion of the public, or for “citizen science”. I suggest that in each case, diversifying science can improve the quality of scient...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Synthese Vol. 200; no. 4; pp. 1 - 29
Autor principal: Schroeder, S. Andrew
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature Aug2022
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=158089697&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 158089697
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00397857
        4LI
      jtl: Synthese
      issn: 00397857
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Aug2022
      vid: 200
      iid: 4
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        158089697
        10.1007/s11229-022-03774-z
      ppf: 1
      ppct: 28
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 890KB
      tig:
        atl: Diversifying science: comparing the benefits of citizen science with the benefits of bringing more women into science.
      aug:
        au: Schroeder, S. Andrew
        affil: Claremont McKenna College, 850 Columbia Ave, 91711, Claremont, CA, USA
      sug:
      keyword:
        Citizen science
        Feminist philosophy of science
        Political philosophy of science
        Values in science
      ab: I compare two different arguments for the importance of bringing new voices into science: arguments for increasing the representation of women, and arguments for the inclusion of the public, or for “citizen science”. I suggest that in each case, diversifying science can improve the quality of scientific results in three distinct ways: epistemically, ethically, and politically. In the first two respects, the mechanisms are essentially the same. In the third respect, the mechanisms are importantly different. Though this might appear to suggest a broad similarity between the cases, I show that the analysis reveals an important respect in which efforts to include the public are more complex. With citizen science programs, unlike with efforts to bring more women into science, the three types of improvement are often in conflict with one another: improvements along one dimension may come at a cost on another dimension, suggesting difficult trade-offs may need to be made.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Synthese is a copyright of Springer, 2022. All Rights Reserved.
      item: Synthese
      holder: Springer Nature
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2022
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N