No bio entered.
We consider scientific communities where each scientist employs one of two characteristic methods: an “all right” method (A) and a “better method” (B). The quality of methodology is relevant to the epistemic products of these scientists, and generate credit for their users. Higher-credit methods tend to be imitated, allowing to explore whether communities will adopt one method or the other. We use the model to examine the effects of (1) bias for existing methods, (2) competence to assess relative value of competing methods, and (3) interdisciplinarity: the tendency for members of a scientific community to receive meaningful credit assignment from those outside their community.