David Kamper critiques the current incentives of researchers in The Michigan Daily:
Problems have been developing within the world science community, especially in the United States, for the past fifty years. These issues have stemmed from environments at universities and research institutions where the cutthroat settings incentivizes flashy results to improve career opportunities. Additionally, the science publication system has turned into a system remarkably similar to that of Wall Street, where high ranking journals have scientists by the throat, often consolidating the wealth of their organizations and using the science for financial gain, not to benefit the human condition. It is within these confines that science today operates. Science should be about its content and aid to the public, not its monetary impetus.
The observation “… remarkably similar to that of Wall Street …” should send chills up the spines of serious folks everywhere. Science should not be motivated by money, because that pollutes the methods of science. It is impossible to isolate the methods of science from the incursion of incentives – of goals – foreign to science. If the institutions of science are merely focused on making money, then how do the procedures of science which makes it uniquely valuable hope to survive without corruption?
Perhaps a re-examination of science, it’s ideal goals and supporting processes, should be executed, and then that would give ammunition for reforming the institutions which are currently suboptimal. If society thinks science is valuable, then it must be ready to support it in the manner in which it operates optimally – and that doesn’t mean how it makes the most money. If we value scientists who produce reliable research, then our incentives should reflect that; and those scientists who gather mentions on Retraction Watch should be considered the bottom of the dung heap. Other important processes include replication of other studies, peer reviews, removal of journals which do not employ “gold standard” processes, and others.
These processes and incentives have been in place, but I worry that they are slowly being twisted as the private sector mindset invades the educational sector which often supports scientific research. Just being a fan, I don’t have any direct experience with the general education of wannabe scientists – and the private sector values are often pervasive to the point where other sectors’ values are not recognized or known, unless the student happens to come from a family steeped in the tradition.
