What is a scientific article? This paper proposes that the scientific article can be understood the main unit in a piece-rate system that solves research patrons’ problems of fairly evaluating and paying scientists. It is a solution for the evaluation of science given information asymmetries between lay people and scientists. To elucidate a definition in keeping with the principal-agent approach, this paper extends both former explanations of the research article and proposals of publications as attestations to science patrons.
ArrowKJ (1985) The economics of agency. In: PrattJWZeckhauserRJ (eds) Principals and Agents: The Structure of Business. Boston: Harvard Business School, 37–51.
2.
BarnesB (1985) About Science. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
3.
BazermanC (1988) Shaping Written Knowledge. The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin.
4.
BraunD (1993) Who governs intermediary agencies? Principal-agent relations in research policy-making. Journal of Public Policy13(2): 135–162.
5.
CallonMLawJRipA (eds) (1986) Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology. London: MacMillan.
6.
ColeS (2000) The role of journals in the growth of scientific knowledge. In: CroninBAtkinsHB (eds) The Web of Knowledge: A Festschrift in Honour of Eugene Garfield, ASIS Monograph Series. Medford: Information Today, Inc, 109–42.
7.
ColeSColeJR (1967) Scientific output and recognition: A study in the operation of the reward system in science. American Sociological Review32(3): 377–390.
8.
CsiszarA (2018) The Scientific Journal. Chicago: The University of Chicago.
9.
DasguptaPDavidPA (1987) Information disclosure and the economics of science and technology. In: FeiwelGR (ed) Arrow and the Ascent of Modern Economic Theory. London: Macmillan, 519–542.
10.
DewettTDenisiAS (2004) Exploring scholarly reputation: It’s more than just productivity. Scientometrics60(2): 249–272.
11.
FerejohnJA (1986) Incumbent performance and electoral control. Public Choice50: 5–25.
12.
Fernández-CarroR (2007) A principal–agent model of public research with a retrospective payoff rule. Science and Public Policy34(5): 317–328.
13.
Fernández-CarroRLapuente-GinéV (2016) The Emperor’s clothes and the Pied Piper: Bureaucracy and scientific productivity. Science and Public Policy43(4): 546–561.
14.
FranckG (2002) The scientific economy of attention: A novel approach to the collective rationality of science. Scientometrics55(1): 3–26.
15.
FleckL (1979) Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact. FBradleyTJTrenn (trans). Chicago: University of Chicago.
16.
GalisonP (2003) The collective author. In: BiagioliMGalisonP (eds) Scientific Authorship: Credit and Intellectual Property in Science. New York: Routledge, 325–355.
17.
GilbertNMulkayM (1981) Contexts of scientific discourse: Social accounting in experimental papers. In: KnorrKDKrohnRWhitleyR (eds) The Social Process of Scientific Investigation. Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 269–94.
18.
Gómez-MejíaLRBalkinDB (1992) Determinants of faculty pay: An agency theory perspective. The Academy of Management Journal35(5): 921–955.
19.
GrossAGHarmonJEReidyMA (2002) Communicating Science. The Scientific Article from the 17th Century to the Present. West Lafayette: Parlor Press.
20.
GustonDH (1996) Principal-agent theory and the structure of science policy. Science and Public Policy23(4): 229–240.
21.
GustonDH (2000) Between Politics and Science. Assuring the Integrity and Productivity of Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
22.
HarmonJEGrossAG (1996) The scientific style manual: A reliable guide to practice?Technical Communication43(1): 61–72.
23.
HarmonJEGrossAG (2007) The Scientific Literature: A Guided Tour. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
24.
JohnsA (2001) The birth of scientific reading. Nature409(6818): 287.
25.
KiserE (1999) Comparing varieties of agency theory in economics, political science, and sociology: An illustration from state policy implementation. Sociological Theory17(2): 146–170.
26.
KnorrKDKrohnRWhitleyR (eds) (1981) The Social Process of Scientific Investigation. Dordrecht: D Reidel.
27.
Knorr-CetinaKMulkayM (1983) Science Observed. Perspectives on the Social Study of Science. London: SAGE.
28.
KuhnTS (1970) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
29.
LamontM (2009) How Professors Think. Inside the Curious World of Academic Judgment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
30.
LapuenteVFernández-CarroR (2008) Political regimes, bureaucracy, and scientific productivity. Politics & Policy36(6): 1006–1043.
31.
LatourB (1987) Science in Action. How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
32.
LatourB (2005) Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
33.
LatourBBastideF (1986) Writing science – Fact and fiction: The analysis of the process of reality construction through the application of socio-semiotic methods to scientific texts. In: CallonMLawJRipA (eds) Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology. London: MacMillan, 51–66.
34.
LatourBWoolgarS (1979) Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of a Scientific Fact. Beverly Hills: SAGE.
35.
LawJ (1986) The heterogeneity of texts. In: CallonMLawJRipA (eds) Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology. London: MacMillan, 67–83.
36.
LazearEP (1986) Salaries and piece rates. Journal of Business59(3): 405–431.
37.
LazearEP (2000) Performance pay and productivity. American Economic Review90(5): 1346–1361.
38.
MertonRK (1942) A note on science and technology in a democratic order. Journal of Legal and Political Sociology 1–2: 115–126.
39.
MertonRK (1968) The Matthew Effect in science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered. Science159(3810): 56–63.
40.
MertonRK (1973a) The normative structure of science. In: StorerNW (ed) The Sociology of Science. Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 267–278.
41.
MertonRK (1973b) ‘Recognition’ and ‘excellence’: Instructive ambiguities. In: StorerNW (ed) The Sociology of Science. Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 419–438.
42.
MertonRK (1973c) Priorities in scientific discovery. In: StorerNW (ed) The Sociology of Science. Theoretical and Empirical Investigation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 286–324.
43.
MertonRK (1973d) Institutionalized patterns of evaluation in science. In: StorerNW (ed) The Sociology of Science. Theoretical and Empirical Investigation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 460–496.
44.
MoeTM (1984) The new economics of organization. American Journal of Political Science, 28(4): 739–775.
45.
PerrowC (1986) Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay. New York: Random House.
46.
PetersenT (1993) Recent developments in: The economics of organization: The principal-agent relationship. Acta Sociologica36(3, Rational Choice Theory): 277–293.
47.
PettiferSMcDermottPMarshJThorneDVillegerAAttwoodTK (2011) Ceci n’est pas un hamburger: Modelling and representing the scholarly article. Learned Publishing24(3): 207–220.
48.
PrattJWZeckhauserRJ (1985) Principals and agents: An overview. In: Principals and Agents: The Structure of Business. Boston: Harvard Business School, 1–35.
49.
PrendergastC (1999) The provision of incentives in firms. Journal of Economic LiteratureXXXVII(1): 7–63.
50.
RipA (1994) The Republic of Science in the 1990s. Higher Education28(1): 3–23.
51.
RipAvan der MeulenB (1995) The post-modern research system. Science and Public Policy23(6): 343–332.
52.
SeglenPO (1996) Quantification of scientific article contents. Scientometrics35(3): 355–366.
53.
SpenceMZeckhauserR (1971) Insurance, information, and individual action. The American Economic Review61(2): 380–387.
54.
TiroleJ (1994) The internal organization of government. Oxford Economic Papers46: 1–29.
55.
TuckmanHPHagemannRP (1976) An analysis of the reward structure in two disciplines. The Journal of Higher Education47(4): 447–464.
56.
TuckmanHPLeaheyJ (1975) What is an article worth?Journal of Political Economy83(5): 951–967.
57.
TurnerS (1990) Forms of patronage. In: CozzensSEGierynTF (eds) Theories of Science in Society. Bloomington: Indiana University, 185–211.
58.
TurnerS (2002) Scientists as agents. In: MirowskiPSentE-M (eds) Science Bought and Sold. Chicago: The University of Chicago, 362–384.
59.
Van der MeulenB (1998) Science policies as principal–agent games: institutionalization and path-dependency in the relation between government and science. Research Policy27(4): 397–414.
60.
WhitleyR (1981) The context of scientific investigation. In: KnorrKDKrohnRWhitleyR (eds) The Social Process of Scientific Investigation. Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 297–321.
61.
WhitleyR (2000, 1984) The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences. 2nd ed.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
62.
WoolgarS (1981) Discovery: The logic and sequence in a scientific text. In: KnorrKDKrohnRWhitleyR (eds) The Social Process of Scientific Investigation. Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 239–268.
