The meaning of objectivity in any specific setting reflects historically situated understandings of both science and self. Recently, various scientific fields have confronted growing mistrust about the replicability of findings, and statistical techniques have been deployed to articulate a “crisis of false positives.” In response, epistemic activists have invoked a decidedly economic understanding of scientists’ selves. This has prompted a scientific social movement of proposed reforms, including regulating disclosure of “backstage” research details and enhancing incentives for replication. We theorize that together, these events represent the emergence of a new formulation of objectivity. Statistical objectivity assesses the integrity of research literatures in the results observed in collections of studies rather than the methodological details of individual studies and thus positions meta-analysis as the ultimate arbiter of scientific objectivity. Statistical objectivity presents a challenge to scientific communities and raises new questions for sociological theory about tensions between quantification and expertise.

中文翻译：

---

统计客观性的出现：认识论的副恶和科学道德观念的转变

在任何特定环境中，客观性的含义都反映了对科学和自我的历史理解。最近，各个科学领域都对发现的可复制性产生了越来越多的不信任，并且已经采用了统计技术来阐明“假阳性危机”。作为回应，认知活动家已经对科学家的自我产生了确定的经济理解。这推动了拟议中的改革的科学社会运动，包括规范“后台”研究细节的披露和增强复制动机。我们认为，这些事件一起代表了客观性新表述的出现。统计客观性是根据研究集合中观察到的结果而不是单个研究的方法论细节来评估研究文献的完整性，因此将荟萃分析定位为科学客观性的最终仲裁者。统计客观性对科学界提出了挑战，并给社会学理论带来了有关量化和专业知识之间的紧张关系的新问题。