ABSTRACT

Scientific publications depict science as an orderly endeavour and the epitome of rationality. In contrast, scientific practice is messy and not strictly rational. Here, I analyse this inconsistency, which is recurrent, and try to clarify its meaning for the functioning of science. The discussion is based on a review of relevant literature and detailed analysis of the role of each of the three intervening elements, the scientist, his/her practice and the scientific publication, with an emphasis on the circular mode of the latter’s creation. This way, I will discuss the nature, causes and relevance of the inconsistency. That corresponds to answering three questions, respectively: ‘what are the characteristics of the inconsistency?’, ‘what are its origins?’ and ‘how could it be interpreted within a model for the structure and functioning of science?’ From this discussion it is concluded that, contrary to the negative character generally attributed to it, the inconsistency between practice and reporting is part of the production mechanism of science.

摘要

科学出版物将科学描述为有序的努力和理性的缩影。相比之下，科学实践是混乱的、不严格理性的。在这里，我分析了这种反复出现的不一致，并试图阐明其对科学运作的意义。讨论基于对相关文献的回顾和对科学家、他/她的实践和科学出版物这三个介入要素各自的作用的详细分析，重点是后者创作的循环模式。这样，我将讨论不一致的性质、原因和相关性。这对应于分别回答三个问题：“不一致的特征是什么？”，“它的起源是什么？” 以及“如何在科学结构和功能的模型中解释它？” 从这次讨论中得出的结论是，与通常归因于它的负面特征相反，实践和报告之间的不一致是科学生产机制的一部分。