Evaluation, Transparency, and Democracy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52712/issn.1850-0013-952Keywords:
science, evaluation systems, peer review, democracyAbstract
Scientists’ individual responsibility has decreased, partly, because of the 20th century science organization. The social character of science and the responsibility that this has entailed can be read through an analysis of the peer review system. In this paper the author makes a critical review of this system to unveil its main features and to propose opener evaluation alternatives.
Downloads
References
FULLER, Steve (2002): Knowledge Management Foundations, Boston-Oxford, Butterworth Heinemann.
GIBBONS, Michael , et al (1994): The New Production of Knowledge, Londres, Sage.
LENOIR, Timothy, HAYS, Marguerite (2000): “The Manhattan Project for Biomedicina”, en Sloan, Phillip (ed.)
PÉREZ SEDEÑO, Eulalia (2006): “Objetividad, evaluación por pares y valores”, en J.F. Álvarez y R. Rodríguez Aramayo (eds.) Disenso e incertidumbre. Un homenaje a Javier Muguerza, Madrid, CSIC-Plaza y Valdés.
SLOAN, Phillip [ed.] (2000): Controlling Our Destinies: Historical, Philosophical, Ethical, and Theological Perspectives on the Human Genome Project, University of Notre Dame Press.
WENERAS, Christine, WOLD, Agnes (1997): “Sexism and nepotism in peer review”, Nature, 387, pp. 321-343.
WENERAS, Christine, WOLD, Agnes (1999): “Bias and peer review of research proposals”, en Smith, J. y Smith, R. (eds.), Peer Review in Health Care, British Medical Journal Publishing, pp. 77-87.
ZIMAN, John (2000): Real Science, Cambridge University Press. Traducción español: La ciencia tal cual es (2002): Madrid, CUP-Iberia.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 CC Attribution 4.0
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All CTS's issues and academic articles are under a CC-BY license.
Since 2007, CTS has provided open and free access to all its contents, including the complete archive of its quarterly edition and the different products presented in its electronic platform. This decision is based on the belief that offering free access to published materials helps to build a greater and better exchange of knowledge.
In turn, for the quarterly edition, CTS allows institutional and thematic repositories, as well as personal web pages, to self-archive articles in their post-print or editorial version, immediately after the publication of the final version of each issue and under the condition that a link to the original source will be incorporated into the self-archive.
