Economic Approaches to Understanding Scientific Norms

Episteme

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 184-200

  Strevens, Michael ^a  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85010120456     PISSN: 17423600     EISSN: 17500117     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3366/epi.2011.0015     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Albert M. 2011. “Methodology and Scientific Competition.” Episteme 8(2): 165–83.
2. Barnes B. D. and Bloor J. H. 1996. Scientific Knowledge: A Sociological Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3. Brock W. A. and Durlauf S. N. 1999. “A Formal Model of Theory Choice in Science.” Economic Theory 14: 113–30.
4. Dasgupta P. and David P. A. 1994. “Toward a New Economics of Science.” Research Policy 23: 487–521.
5. Goldman A. I. and Shaked M. 1991. “An Economic Model of Scientific Activity and Truth Acquisition.” Philosophical Studies 63: 31–55.
6. Hull D. 1988. Science as a Process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
7. Kitcher P. 1990. “The Division of Cognitive Labor.” Journal of Philosophy 87: 5–21.
8. Kitcher P. 1993. The Advancement of Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
9. Kuhn T. S. 1996. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
10. Merton R. K. 1942. “Science and Technology in a Democratic Order.” Journal of Legal and Political Sociology 1: 115–26. Reprinted as “The Normative Structure of Science” in (Merton 1973).
11. Merton R. K. 1957/1973. “Priorities in Scientific Discovery.” American Sociological Review 22: 635–59. Page references are to the 1973 reprint.
12. Merton R. K. 1968. “The Matthew Effect in Science.” Science 159: 56–63.
13. Merton R. K. 1973. The Sociology of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
14. Mirowski P. 1997. “On Playing the Economics Trump Card in the Philosophy of Science: Why It Did Not Work for Michael Polanyi.” Philosophy of Science 64: S127–38.
15. Peirce C. S. 1879. “Note on the Theory of the Economy of Research.” In Report of the Superintendent of the United States Coast Survey Showing the Progress of the Work for the Fiscal Year Ending with June 1876, pp. 197–201. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
16. Polanyi M. 1962. “The Republic of Science.” Minerva 1: 54–73.
17. Rueger A. 1996. “Risk and Diversification in Theory Choice.” Synthese 109: 263–80.
18. Sarkar H. 1983. A Theory of Method. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
19. Strevens M. 2003. “The Role of the Priority Rule in Science.” Journal of Philosophy 100: 55–79.
20. Strevens M. 2006. “The Role of the Matthew Effect in Science.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 37: 159–70.
21. Strevens M. 2010. “Reconsidering Authority: Scientific Expertise, Bounded Rationality, and Epistemic Backtracking.” Oxford Studies in Epistemology 3: 294–330.
22. Weisberg M. and Muldoon R. 2009. “Epistemic Landscapes and the Division of Cognitive Labor.” Philosophy of Science 76: 225–52.
23. Zollman K. J. S. 2010. “The Epistemic Benefit of Transient Diversity.” Erkenntnis 72: 17–35.