Why are some scientific papers particularly influential? What social factors lead to the creation of research papers that significantly impact scientific research and practice? Social scientists have a long history of studying which factors promote or impede scientific success and influence. However, traditional explanations for variation in scientific influence overlook scientists' own perceptions, even though incorporating social actors' own understandings is critical to a complete explanation. This project, co-funded by the Science, Technology, and Society program and the Science of Innovation and Science Policy program, examines the topic of scientific success by capitalizing on a unique and underutilized data source: essays solicited by the Web of Science and written by authors of influential scientific papers ("Citation Classics"). In these essays, scientists reflect upon the development and reception of their Citation Classic. Preliminary content analyses suggest that scientists emphasize social aspects of their work and see their work as a stepping stone between previous and subsequent research. The work proposed here includes coding and calibrating data to make it amenable for Qualitative Comparative Analysis (a method developed by Co-PI Ragin) and extending this tool to make it amenable to situations in which there may be different paths to a common outcome. The researchers will use this methodological innovation to produce typologies that identify key components of scientific influence and demonstrate how they work in conjunction -- a critical goal for a theoretically integrative approach. This new application of QCA, will allow the PIs to discern the multiple recipes (indeed, not just multiple ingredients) for scientific influence, and assess how they vary across time, discipline, collaborative status, and citation trajectory.
This project will have broad impact by developing a freely available analytic tool and computer software program. The project will also have broad impact by assessing the factors relevant to producing influential science. Understanding the conditions that foster scholarly influence should help researchers understand how to produce research with greater impact and aid the development of effective science policy. Understanding how influence is attained differently in recent years, for more gender-integrated disciplines, and for collaborative projects (where women scientists show greater involvement) may also help us understand and thereby reduce gender inequity in science.
The main goal of our research was to understand how influential scientific research is produced. To do this, we analyzed essays written by authors of influential scientific papers using a technique (analytic induction) developed by the co-investigator on this project. The essays, as a data source, gave us access to scientists’ own accounts of their success, and the technique allowed us to identify key correlates of scientific influence and demonstrate how they work in conjunction. Our results show that four ingredients – relationships, the novelty of the work, its usefulness to others, and overcoming challenges – characterize a large majority of scientific success stories. We published these results in the leading sociology of science journal: Social Studies of Science. The data also served as the basis for two additional, related studies. One paper, in press at Gender, Work, & Organization, finds that in scientific disciplines where informal relationships with friends, colleagues, and spouses are openly discussed, women are likely to be integrated beyond a token level. A second paper (in press at Science, Technology, & Human Values) uses Correspondence Analysis to show that not just the amount, but the type of emotional expression varies considerably by discipline. Our research has several broad impacts. Most tangibly, we developed a freely available analytic tool and computer software program, so that other scientists can use the technique we did here. We also shed light on the conditions that foster scholarly influence, which will ideally help the scientific community and its supporters produce research with greater impact. Our finding that even the most influential science faces challenges may inspire other scientists facing setbacks to persevere. Our finding of diverse routes to success should encourage the development of multiple strategies for career success, perhaps allowing a more diverse set of scientists to succeed. Our finding that all kinds of relationships – not just professional ones – are often critical to scientific success may encourage scientists and research managers to encourage work/life balance. Our finding that even in male-dominated fields, the culture of a discipline and its openness to women might affect the recruitment and retention of women should be useful to administrators (at university, college, and department levels) and science policy experts and managers of scientific organizations as they aim to develop ideal working conditions. Our finding that some form of emotional expression permeates all disciplines allows us to view the traditional ‘hierarchy of the sciences’ (ranging from the ‘pure’ natural science to the ‘softer’ social sciences) in a more multi-dimensional way.
