Explaining field differences in openness and sharing in scientific communities

This paper explores field differences in openness and sharing of scientific knowledge based on a comparative ethnographic field study of research groups in two research specialties. Tensions between cooperation and openness on the one hand and competition for priority and secrecy on the other hand are common in science. However, fields differ in how these tensions play out, influencing what information is exchanged when and how among research groups in a field. This paper develops an explanatory framework that identifies assumptions made in the generic model of the collective production process in the sciences and specifies epistemic and material field characteristics that affect to what extent those assumptions hold for a specific field, explaining field differences in openness and secrecy behaviors. I suggest that these field-inherent sources for differences in openness and sharing behaviors need to be accounted for in research policies and in the design of information and communication systems that aim to support and advance the collective production of knowledge in science.

[1]  R. Kohler,.  Lords of the fly: Drosophila genetics and the experimental life. , 1995 .

[2]  Herbert Van de Sompel,et al.  Rethinking Scholarly Communication: Building the System that Scholars Deserve , 2004, D Lib Mag..

[3]  J. Polkinghorne.  Secretiveness and competition for priority of discovery in physics , 1972 .

[4]  B. Cronin.  Scholarly communication and epistemic cultures , 2003 .

[5]  Rob Kling,et al.  The real stakes of virtual publishing: The transformation of E-Biomed into PubMed central , 2004, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[6]  Jochen Gläser,et al.  What Internet Use Does and Does Not Change in Scientific Communities , 2003 .

[7]  W. D. Garvey.  Communication, the essence of science , 1979 .

[8]  H. Rheinberger.  Experimental Complexity in Biology: Some Epistemological and Historical Remarks , 1997, Philosophy of Science.

[9]  C. Hine.  Systematics as Cyberscience: Computers, Change, and Continuity in Science , 2008 .

[10]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  Scientific software production: incentives and collaboration , 2011, CSCW.

[11]  Carl Lagoze,et al.  A research agenda for data curation cyberinfrastructure , 2011, JCDL '11.

[12]  Wei Hong,et al.  For Money or Glory? Commercialization, Competition, and Secrecy in the Entrepreneurial University , 2009 .

[13]  H. M. Collins,et al.  The TEA Set: Tacit Knowledge and Scientific Networks , 1974 .

[14]  Rob Kling,et al.  a Bit More to It: Scholarly Communication Forums as Socio-technical Interaction Networks , 2003, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[15]  Paul Dourish,et al.  The value of data: considering the context of production in data economies , 2011, CSCW.

[16]  S. Hilgartner.  Biomolecular Databases , 1995 .

[17]  Roald Hoffmann,et al.  What might philosophy of science look like if chemists built it? , 2007, Synthese.

[18]  Geoffrey C. Bowker,et al.  Collaborative rhythm: temporal dissonance and alignment in collaborative scientific work , 2011, CSCW.

[19]  Jonathon N. Cummings,et al.  Research team integration: what it is and why it matters , 2011, CSCW '11.

[20]  Jochen Glaser.  Wissenschaftliche Produktionsgemeinschaften: die soziale ordnung der forschung [Scientific Production Communities. The Social Order of Research] , 2006 .

[21]  G. Laudel,et al.  The Social Construction Of Bibliometric Evaluations , 2007 .

[22]  K. Knorr-Cetina,et al.  Epistemic cultures : how the sciences make knowledge , 1999 .

[23]  Natasa Milic-Frayling,et al.  Beyond data sharing: artifact ecology of a collaborative nanophotonics research centre , 2012, CSCW.

[24]  Communicating chemistry. , 2009, Nature chemistry.

[25]  John P. Walsh,et al.  Computer Networks and Scientific Work , 1996 .

[26]  Michael Nentwich,et al.  Cyberscience: Modelling ICT-induced changes of the scholarly communication system , 2005 .

[27]  L. Jeppesen,et al.  The Value of Openness in Scientific Problem Solving , 2007 .

[28]  Joachim Schummer,et al.  Scientometric studies on chemistry II: Aims and methods of producing new chemical substances , 1997, Scientometrics.

[29]  W. Hagstrom.  Competition in Science , 1974 .

[30]  Edward J. Hackett,et al.  Essential Tensions , 2005 .

[31]  S. Hilgartner.  Selective flows of knowledge in technoscientific interaction: information control in genome research , 2012, The British Journal for the History of Science.

[32]  Gn Gilbert,et al.  Competition, differentiation and careers in science , 1977 .

[33]  Jeremy P. Birnholtz,et al.  Data at work: supporting sharing in science and engineering , 2003, GROUP.

[34]  Peter Lang.  Why Do Chemists Perform Experiments? , 2004 .

[35]  Jenny Fry,et al.  The intellectual and social organization of academic fields and the shaping of digital resources , 2007, J. Inf. Sci..

[36]  Rob Kling,et al.  Not just a matter of time: Field differences and the shaping of electronic media in supporting scientific communication , 1999, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[37]  David L. Hull,et al.  A mechanism and its metaphysics: An evolutionary account of the social and conceptual development of science , 1988 .

[38]  Paul Atkinson,et al.  Trajectories of Collaboration and Competition in a Medical Discovery , 1998 .