1,721,021 research outputs found

    Replication data for: Retractions

    No full text
    Azoulay, Pierre, Furman, Jeffrey L., Krieger, Joshua L., and Murray, Fiona, (2015) "Retractions." Review of Economics and Statistics 97:5, 1118-1136

    Replication data for: Retractions

    No full text
    Azoulay, Pierre, Furman, Jeffrey L., Krieger, Joshua L., and Murray, Fiona, (2015) "Retractions." Review of Economics and Statistics 97:5, 1118-1136

    Matthew: Effect or Fable?

    Full text link
    In a market context, a status effect occurs when actors are accorded differential recognition for their efforts depending on their location in a status ordering, holding constant the quality of these efforts. In practice, because it is very difficult to measure quality, this ceteris paribus proviso often precludes convincing empirical assessments of the magnitude of status effects. We address this problem by examining the impact of a major status-conferring prize that shifts actors' positions in a prestige ordering. Specifically, using a precisely constructed matched sample, we estimate the effect of a scientist becoming a Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI) Investigator on citations to articles the scientist published before the prize was awarded. We do find evidence of a postappointment citation boost, but the effect is small and limited to a short window of time. Consistent with theories of status, however, the effect of the prize is significantly larger when there is uncertainty about article quality, and when prize winners are of (relatively) low status at the time of election to the HHMI Investigator Program.National Science Foundation (U.S.) (SciSIP Program [Award SBE-0738142]

    The Diffusion of Scientific Knowledge across Time and Space

    Full text link
    This chapter discusses the consequences of academic mobility and the extent to which the movement of high-achieving faculty members affects both scientific and commercialization activities at their old and new schools. It looks at articles published by, and patents granted to, the mobile scientist before they departed for the new school, comparing these to similar outputs by scientists who did not move. The heterogeneity that can distort simpler comparisons can be limited. The analysis suggests that the citations to a departing scientist's articles from the university where he or she departs are barely affected by the move. However, citations to the departing scientist's patents (whether made in articles or patents) decline sharply at the originating school. This suggests that the physical proximity of the researcher is important to ensuring knowledge flows to industry. Citations to the scientist's work at his or her new location increase dramatically once the move is complete. Barriers to scientific mobility may actually be socially detrimental, as they prevent the kind of knowledge gains from the mixing of ideas. Keywords: diffusion; scientific knowledge; professional transitions; academic mobility; physical proximity; researche

    National Institutes of Health Peer Review: Challenges and Avenues for Reform

    No full text
    The National Institute of Health (NIH), through its extramural grant program, is the primary public funder of health-related research in the United States. Peer review at NIH is organized around the twin principles of investigator initiation and rigorous peer review, and this combination has long been a model that science funding agencies throughout the world seek to emulate. However, lean budgets and the rapidly changing ecosystem within which scientific inquiry takes place have led many to ask whether the peer-review practices inherited from the immediate postwar era are still well suited to 21st-century realities. In this essay, we examine two salient issues: (1) the aging of the scientist population supported by NIH and (2) the innovativeness of the research supported by the institutes. We identify potential avenues for reform as well as a means for implementing and evaluating them

    The applied value of public investments in biomedical research

    Full text link
    Scientists and policy-makers have long argued that public investments in science have practical applications. Using data on patents linked to U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants over a 27-year period, we provide a large-scale accounting of linkages between public research investments and subsequent patenting. We find that about 10% of NIH grants generate a patent directly but 30% generate articles that are subsequently cited by patents. Although policy-makers often focus on direct patenting by academic scientists, the bulk of the effect of NIH research on patenting appears to be indirect. We also find no systematic relationship between the “basic” versus “applied” research focus of a grant and its propensity to be cited by a patent

    Social Influence Given (Partially) Deliberate Matching: Career Imprints in the Creation of Academic Entrepreneurs

    No full text
    Actors and associates often match on a few dimensions that matter most for the relationship at hand. In so doing, they are exposed to unanticipated social influences because counterparts have broader attitudes and preferences than would-be contacts considered when they first chose to pair. The authors label as “partially deliberate” social matching that occurs on a small set of attributes, and they present empirical methods for identifying causal social influence effects when relationships follow this generative logic. A data set tracking the training and professional activities of academic biomedical scientists is used to show that young scientists adopt their advisers’ orientations toward commercial science as evidenced by adviser-to-advisee transmission of patenting behavior. The authors demonstrate this in twostage models that account for the endogeneity of matching, using both inverse probability of treatment weights and an instrumental variables approach. They also draw on qualitative methods to support a causal interpretation. Overall, they present a theory and a triangulation of methods to establish evidence of social influence when tie formation is partially deliberate

    Superstar Extinction

    No full text
    We estimate the magnitude of spillovers generated by 112 academic “superstars” who died prematurely and unexpectedly, thus providing an exogenous source of variation in the structure of their collaborators’ coauthorship networks. Following the death of a superstar, we find that collaborators experience, on average, a lasting 5% to 8% decline in their quality-adjusted publication rates. By exploring interactions of the treatment effect with a variety of star, coauthor, and star/coauthor dyad characteristics, we seek to adjudicate between plausible mechanisms that might explain this finding. Taken together, our results suggest that spillovers are circumscribed in idea space, but less so in physical or social space. In particular, superstar extinction reveals the boundaries of the scientific field to which the star contributes—the “invisible college.”National Science Foundation (U.S.) (SciSIP program (Award SBE-0738142))Merck Company FoundationNational Institutes of Health (U.S.) (Contract HHSN263200900009C

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore