Can Scientific Communities Profit from Evaluative Diversity?

Abstract Current models of scientific inquiry assume scientists to all share the same evaluative standards. However, science is often characterised by multiple ones, that is by evaluative diversity . We investigate how scientific success is affected by evaluative diversity through computer-based simulations. Our results show that communities with diverse standards profit immensely from scientists sharing all the approaches they explored, regardless of whether they considered them valuable. Moreover, we find that even a moderate degree of evaluative diversity can, under certain conditions, lead scientists to reach more satisfying results than those they would reach in homogeneous communities.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Philosophy of Science
Published
2025-09-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/psa.2025.10174
Primary Topic
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Can Scientific Communities Profit from Evaluative Diversity?

Matteo Michelini, Javier Osorio
Philosophy of Science
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
article

Can Scientific Communities Profit from Evaluative Diversity?

Matteo Michelini, Javier Osorio
article en

Abstract

Abstract Current models of scientific inquiry assume scientists to all share the same evaluative standards. However, science is often characterised by multiple ones, that is by evaluative diversity . We investigate how scientific success is affected by evaluative diversity through computer-based simulations. Our results show that communities with diverse standards profit immensely from scientists sharing all the approaches they explored, regardless of whether they considered them valuable. Moreover, we find that even a moderate degree of evaluative diversity can, under certain conditions, lead scientists to reach more satisfying results than those they would reach in homogeneous communities.

Philosophy of Science
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (ES), Eindhoven University of Technology (NL), Ruhr University Bochum (DE)
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad
Openalex Percentile: Top 74%
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.