This project will follow controversies of reproducibility in science by looking at research oversight institutions, journal piracy and open access responses. For each domain the project will assess how different actors understand and act upon these crises in science to create robust and reliable science. It will study how their actions and reforms are transforming scientific organization and practices. The broader aim is to offer tools and knowledge for policy makers, reformers, activists, publishers, and journalists seeking to promote reliable and robust science. The study will help identify suggestions for alleviating some of the hidden issues and conflicts within and among reform strategies. It will provide insights for understanding research and public intersections. The findings will be of interest to scientists, science communicators, educators, public, research organizations, scientific publishers and policymakers.
This study will explore the construction of factors that place pressure on science in the production, management, and dissemination of biomedical and behavioral research. It will use interviews, document analysis, and participant observation to compare responses to pressure and reform efforts across domains of knowledge production (reproducibility), oversight (post publication peer review), and research dissemination (open publishing and piracy). By using STS theories that address the relation of social order to knowledge production, this project will explore changes in the organization of science, the relationship between scientific practice and extra-scientific environments, and the perceived inadequacy of prevailing models of science. Thus, in each domain the project's first aim is to understand how perceptions of pressure are related to institutional and practical change in science. Second, these changes are compared to STS theories of scientific order and change to speak to how effective the reforms are at restoring order and changing actors' perceptions.
