The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge

Science

Volumn 316, Issue 5827, 2007, Pages 1036-1039

  Wuchty, Stefan ^a   Jones, Benjamin F ^b   Uzzi, Brian ^a,b  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DOMINANCE; KNOWLEDGE; RESEARCH;

ARTICLE; COST; ENGINEERING; HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; RESEARCH; SCIENCE; SOCIAL INTERACTION; SOCIOLOGY; TASK PERFORMANCE; TEAMWORK;

AUTHORSHIP; BIBLIOMETRICS; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; DATABASES; ENGINEERING; HUMANITIES; KNOWLEDGE; PATENTS; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH; SOCIOLOGY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 34249309179     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: 10959203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.1136099     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. R. K. Merton, Science 159, 56 (1968).
2. P. J. Bowler, I. R. Morus, Making Modern Science: A Historical Survey (Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2005).
3. J. F. English, The Economy of Prestige: Prizes, Awards, and the Circulation of Cultural Value (Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA, 2005).
4. R. Collins, The Sociology of Philosophies: A Global Theory of Intellectual Change (Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA, 1998).
5. D. Cronin, D. Shaw, K. La Barre, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 54, 855 (2003).
6. H. Zuckerman, R. K. Merton, in The Sociology of Science, R. K. Merton, N. Storer, Eds. (Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1973), pp. 545-550.
7. B. F. Jones, Nal. Bur. Econ. Res. Work. Pap. Ser., no. 11360 (2005).
8. D. J. de Solla Price, Little Science, Big Science (Columbia Univ. Press, New York, 1963).
9. J. J. Adams, G. Black, R. Clemmons, P. E. Stephan, Res. Policy 34, 259 (2005).
10. R. Guimerà, B. Uzzi, J. Spiro, L. Amaral, Science 308, 697 (2005).
11. N. Babchuk, K. Bruce, P. George, Am. Sociol. 30, 5 (1999).
12. K. Y. Williams, C. A. O'Reilly, in Research in Organizational Behavior, B. Staw, R. Sutton, Eds. (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, 1998), vol. 20, pp. 77-140.
13. F. S. Fitzgerald, in The Crack Up, E. Wilson, Ed. (New Directions, New York, 1993), p. 122.
14. B. H. Hall, A. B. Jaffe, M. Trajtenberg, Natl. Bur. Econ. Res. Work. Pap. Ser., no. 8498 (2001).
15. M. Trajtenberg, Rand J. Econ. 21, 172 (1990).
16. B. H. Hall, A. B. Jaffe, M. Trajtenberg, Rand J. Econ. 36, 16 (2005).
17. D. W. Aksnes, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 57, 169 (2006).
18. N. S. Ali, H. C. Young, N. M. Ali, Libr. Rev. 45, 39 (1996).
19. Citations received were counted from publication year to 2006. Recent publications have smaller citation counts because they have had less time to be cited, but this effect is standardized when comparing team versus solo publications within a given year.
20. In patenting, we may observe weaker trends because (i) citing earlier work can limit a patent's scope, so that applicants may avoid citations, and (ii) patent examiners typically add the majority of citations, which makes patent citations different from paper citations (26, 27).
21. A self-citation is defined as any citation where a common name exists in the authorship of both the cited and the citing papers. All citations were removed in which a citing and cited author's first initial and last name matched. This method can also eliminate citations where the authors are different people but share the same name. However, performing Monte Carlo simulations on the data, we find that such errors occur in less than 1 of every 2000 citations. Thus, any errors introduced by this method appear negligible. We did not remove self-citations from patents because citations to previous work in the patent literature are primarily assigned by the patent examiner (27), who independently assigns citations to earlier work based on the relevance of previous patents' content.
22. T. S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1970).
23. G. Becker, K. Murphy, Q. J. Econ. 107, 1137 (1992).
24. J. Drenth, JAMA 280, 219 (1998).
25. B. Cronin, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 52, 558 (2001).
26. B. Sampat, "Determinants of patent quality: An empirical analysis" (Columbia Univ., New York, 2005).
27. J. Alcacer, M. Gittelman, Rev. Econ. Stat. 88, 774 (2006).
28. We thank R. Guimera, S. Stern, K. Murnighan, K. Williams Phillips, and two anonymous referees for their helpful comments. The Northwestern Institute on Complex Systems provided financial support.