Quality Criteria as Instruments for Political Control of Sciences

Abstract

The following text disputes the relationship between scientific research approaches, their achievements and comparative evaluations made between them. Some measures of achievement (e.g. economic usability, number of publications, citation index) are created in a way that they systematically benefit or penalize certain research approaches. This is simply due to the structural characteristics these approaches exhibit. For psychology this means, for instance, that biopsychological research approaches are clearly at an advantage compared to cultural psychology approaches if common evaluation measures turn into obligatory standards. Instead of examining the qualities of knowledge, the modes of gaining it are evaluated with foreseeable a priori results. Comparative evaluations resemble pseudo empirical investigations. If this kind of evaluation practice conquers and its outcomes begin regulating decisions in science politics, psychology's vast field of knowledge will drastically narrow. This would result in a massive loss of competence and significant consequences for career politics. URN: urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs020167