Norms of Science

The evaluation of scientific research is based on data protected by secrecy and intellectual property (e.g., Elsevier Scopus or Clarivate Web of Sci-ence). The peer review process is essentially anonymous. While science has progressed thanks to public dialogue, the current evaluation system is centered on private control of information. This represents a fundamental shift from democratic to authoritarian science. Open Science may confront this change only if it is accepted as the heir, in the digital age, of the values and principles that public and democratic science has traditionally fostered in the age of printing, thus becoming the guardian of a democratic society.

The norms and values of Post-Normal Science (PNS) are instrumental in guiding science advice practices. In this article, we report work in progress to systematically investigate the norms and values of PNS through a structured review. An archive of 397 documents was collected, including documents that contribute to the endeavour of ameliorating science advice practices from a PNS perspective. Action and structure-oriented viewpoints are used as complementing perspectives in the analysis of the ethos of PNS. From the actionperspective we study how prototypes of norms and values are reflected upon in negotiations of normative issues relating to science advice. From the structural perspective we study how interrelated prototypes of norms and values are presupposed in prescriptions, proscriptions, and goals for science advice practices. Through this analysis we identify a plurality of interrelated prototypes of norms and values. Finally, we propose an acronym that integrates the analysed plurality of norms and values. As a mnemonic and communicative devise we call this ethos TRUST (Transparency, Robustness, Uncertainty management, Sustainability, and Transdisciplinarity) and propose TRUST as a nexus for future reflective negotiations of ambivalences in post-normal practices of science advice.

I dati su cui si basa la valutazione della ricerca sono segreti o protetti da proprietà intellettuale. La revisione paritaria è prevalentemente anonima. Mentre la scienza è progredita grazie al dialogo pubblico, gli attuali sistemi di valutazione si basano sul controllo privato dell’informazione che fa capo a banche dati digitali proprietarie e dati segreti delle agenzie statali di valutazione. L’unica ragione di questo cambio di paradigma è l’accentramento del potere di governo (o meglio, governance) della scienza. Si tratta di un grande mutamento storico che conduce da una scienza democratica a una scienza autoritaria. L’Open Science può provare a contrastare l’accentramento del potere di governance solo se intende se stessa come l’erede, nell’era digitale, dei valori e dei principi che la scienza pubblica e democratica ha rappresentato nell’era della stampa.

What makes a consensus among scientists credible and convincing? This paper introduces the notion of a "hard-won" consensus and uses examples from recent debates over climate change science to show that this heuristic standard for evaluating the quality of a consensus is widely shared. The extent to which a consensus is "hard won" can be understood to depend on the personal qualities of the participating experts; the article demonstrates the continuing utility of the norms of modern science introduced by Robert K. Merton by showing that individuals on both sides of the climate science debate rely intuitively on Mertonian ideas-interpreted in terms of characterto frame their arguments.

The norms and values of Post-Normal Science (PNS) are instrumental in guiding science advice practices. In this article, we report work in progress to systematically investigate the norms and values of PNS through a structured review. An archive of 397 documents was collected, including documents that contribute to the endeavour of ameliorating science advice practices from a PNS perspective. Action and structure-oriented viewpoints are used as complementing perspectives in the analysis of the ethos of PNS. From the actionperspective we study how prototypes of norms and values are reflected upon in negotiations of normative issues relating to science advice. From the structural perspective we study how interrelated prototypes of norms and values are presupposed in prescriptions, proscriptions, and goals for science advice practices. Through this analysis we identify a plurality of interrelated prototypes of norms and values. Finally, we propose an acronym that integrates the analysed plurality of norms and values. As a mnemonic and communicative devise we call this ethos TRUST (Transparency, Robustness, Uncertainty management, Sustainability, and Transdisciplinarity) and propose TRUST as a nexus for future reflective negotiations of ambivalences in post-normal practices of science advice.

This study aims to investigate faculty perspectives on undergraduate teaching practices from a normative perspective.
Maximum variation for purposeful sampling technique was employed to define the sample for the study. The
diversity in the institutions where the faculty members were employed and academic rank was considered during
sample selection. The sample of the study consisted of 282 faculty members who worked at seventeen different public
universities during 2011-2012 academic-year. College Teaching Behaviors Inventory was used to collect the data.
The Inventory was comprised of 8 categories which included 126 items related to teaching behaviors. The data gathered
from the faculty members were analyzed with the use of simple descriptive statistics like, frequencies, percentages,
and means. Furthermore, t-tests, ANOVA, and multivariate analysis techniques like factor analysis, MANOVA,
and discriminant analysis were also employed to analyze the analyses. The results of the study revealed 5 categories
and 50 behaviors that can be classified as inviolable norms, while there were 10 categories and 64 behaviors that
were classified as admonitory norms. Significant differences were found between inviolable norms and institutions,
disciplines, and faculty rank. Significant differences were found between factors scores related to admonitory norms
and various higher education institutions and academic disciplines. The results of the study are used to provide recommendations
that will aid in the identification and description of normative structure of colleges and universities.

This study aims to investigate faculty perspectives on undergraduate teaching practices from a normative perspective. Maximum variation for purposeful sampling technique was employed to define the sample for the study. The diversity in the institutions where the faculty members were employed and academic rank was considered during sample selection. The sample of the study consisted of 282 faculty members who worked at seventeen different public universities during 2011-2012 academic-year. College Teaching Behaviors Inventory was used to collect the data. The Inventory was comprised of 8 categories which included 126 items related to teaching behaviors. The data gathered from the faculty members were analyzed with the use of simple descriptive statistics like, frequencies, percentages, and means. Furthermore, t-tests, ANOVA, and multivariate analysis techniques like factor analysis, MANOVA, and discriminant analysis were also employed to analyze the analyses. The results of the study...