On material transfer agreements and visibility of researchers in biotechnology

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 2, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 89-100

  Rodriguez, Victor ^a   Janssens, Frizo ^b   Debackere, Koenraad ^a   De Moor, Bart ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^b Katholieke Universiteit Leuven   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Bibliometrics; Biotechnology; h Index; Material transfer agreement; Research material; Scientific reputation

Indexed keywords

EID: 38749150282     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2007.10.003     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Adam M., Carrier M., and Wilholt T. How to serve the customer and still be truthful: Methodological characteristics of applied research. Science and Public Policy 33 (2006) 435-444
2. Aksnes D. Characteristics of highly cited papers. Research Evaluation 12 (2003) 159-170
3. Aksnes D., and Siversten G. The effect of highly cited papers on national citation indicators. Scientometrics 59 (2004) 213-224
4. Allison P., Long J., and Krauze T. Cumulative advantage and inequality in science. American Sociological Review 47 (1982) 615-625
5. Avery R. Enculturation in industrial research. Transactions on Engineering Management 7 (1960) 20-24
6. Bailyn L. Autonomy in the industrial R&D lab. Human Resource Management 24 (1985) 129-146
7. Ball P. Index aims for fair ranking of scientists. Nature 436 (2005) 900
8. Barnes S. Making out in industrial research. Science Studies 1 (1971) 157-175
9. Bornmann L., and Daniel H. Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work?. Scientometrics 65 (2005) 391-392
10. Braun T., and Glänzel W. Chemistry research in Eastern Central Europe (1992-1997): Facts and figures on publication output and citation impact for 13 countries. Scientometrics 49 (2000) 187-214
11. Burrell Q. Hirsch's h-index: A stochastic model. Journal of Informetrics 1 (2007) 16-25
12. Callon M. Actor-network theory: The market test. Actor network and after workshop (1997), Centre for Social Theory and Technology, Keele University, UK
13. Campbell E., Clarridge B., Gokhale M., Birenbaum L., Hilgartner S., Holtzman N., et al. Data withholding in academic genetics: Evidence from a national survey. Journal of the American Medical Association 287 (2002) 473-480
14. Cole S., and Cole J. Scientific output and recognition: A study in the operation of the reward system in science. American Sociological Review 32 (1967) 377-390
15. Cole S., and Cole J. Social stratification in science. American Journal of Physics 42 (1974) 923-924
16. Cotgrove S., and Box S. Science, industry and society (1970), Barnes and Noble, New York, NY
17. Crane D. The gatekeepers of science: Some factors affecting the selection of articles for scientific journals. American Sociology Review 32 (1967) 195-201
18. Crawford E. Nobel: Always the winners, never the losers. Science 282 (1998) 1256-1257
19. Dasgupta P., and David P. Toward a new economics of science. Research Policy 23 (1994) 487-521
20. Debackere K., and Rappa M. Technological communities and the diffusion of knowledge: A replication and validation. R&D Management 24 (1994) 355-371
21. Eisenberg R. Patents and the progress of science: Exclusive rights and experimental use. University of Chicago Law Review 56 (1989) 1017-1086
22. Ellis N. The occupation of science. In: Barnes B. (Ed). Sociology of science (1972), Penguin Books, Baltimore, MD
23. Enzing C., van der Giessen A., and Kern S. Commercialisation of biotechnology: Do dedicated public policies matter?. Science and Public Policy 31 (2004) 371-383
24. Evans J. Stratification in knowledge production: Author prestige and the influence of an American academic debate. Poetics 33 (2005) 111-133
25. Finkenstaedt T., and Fries M. Zur Forschungsmessung in den Geisteswissenschaften. Ad Acta 3 (1978) 110-164
26. Garfield E. Citation indexes in sociological and historical research. American Documentation 14 (1963) 289-291
27. Garfield E. Citation indexing for studying science. Nature 227 (1970) 669-671
28. Garfield E., and Welljams-Dorof A. Of Nobel class: A citation perspective on high impact research authors. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 13 (1992) 117-135
29. Glänzel W. Science in Scandinavia: A bibliometric approach. Scientometrics 48 (2000) 121-150
30. Glänzel W., Meyer M., Schlemmer B., Du Plessis M., Thijs B., Magerman T., et al. Biotechnology: An analysis based on publications and patents (2003), Steunpunt O&O Statistieken, Leuven
31. Hagstrom W. The scientific community (1965), Basic Books, New York, NY
32. Hirsch J. An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102 (2005) 16569-16572
33. Kidd C. Basic research: Description versus definition. In: Kaplan N. (Ed). Science and society (1965), Rand McNally, Chicago, IL
34. Kostoff R. The use and misuse of citation analysis in research evaluation: Comments on theories of citation. Scientometrics 43 (1998) 27-43
35. Latour B. We have never been modern (1993), Harvester Wheatsheaf, London, UK
36. Leydesdorff L. Theories of citation. Scientometrics 43 (1998) 5-25
37. Leydesdorff L., and Etzkowitz H. The triple helix as a model for innovation studies. Science and Public Policy 25 (1998) 195-203
38. Mauss M. The gift: Forms and functions of exchange in archaic societies (1967), Norton and Co., New York, NY
39. McMillan G., and Deeds D. The role of reputation in the recruitment of scientists. R&D Management 28 (1998) pp. 299-278
40. Merton R. The Matthew effect in science. Science 159 (1968) 59
41. Merton R. The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations (1973), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL
42. Moed H. Bibliometric indicators reflect publication and management strategies. Scientometrics 47 (2000) 323-346
43. Mora-Valentin E. A theoretical review of co-operative relationships between firms and universities. Science and Public Policy 29 (2002) 37-46
44. Peritz B. On the objectives of citation analysis: Problems of theory and method. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 43 (1992) 448-451
45. Rodriguez V. Material transfer agreements: Open science vs. proprietary claims. Nature Biotechnology 23 (2005) 489-491
46. Rodriguez V. Material transfer agreements: When technology managers collide. BNA's Patent, Trademark and Copyright Journal 73 (2007) 305-308
47. Rodriguez V. Merton and Ziman's modes of science: The case of material transfer agreements. Science and Public Policy 34 (2007) 355-363
48. Rodriguez, V. (2008). Governance of material transfer agreements. Technology in Society, 30, in press.
49. Rodriguez, V., & Debackere, K. (2007). Strategies for satisfying the need of research materials. Les Nouvelles September, 529-533.
50. Rodriguez V., Janssens F., Debackere K., and De Moor B. Do material transfer agreements affect the choice of research agendas? The case of biotechnology in Belgium. Scientometrics 71 (2007) 239-269
51. Rodriguez V., Janssens F., Debackere K., and De Moor B. Material transfer agreements and collaborative publication activity: The case of a biotechnology network. Research Evaluation 16 (2007) 123-136
52. Rousseau R. The influence of missing publications on the Hirsch index. Journal of Informetrics 1 (2007) 2-7
53. Shilling C., and Bernard J. Informal communication among bioscientists (1964), George Washington University, Washington, DC
54. Van Raan A. Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgement for 147 chemistry research groups. Scientometrics 67 (2006) 491-502
55. Walsh J., Arora A., and Cohen W. Research tool patenting and licensing and biomedical innovation. In: Cohen W., and Merrill S. (Eds). Patents in the knowledge-based economy (2003), National Academies Press, Washington, DC
56. Walsh, J., Cho, C., & Cohen, W. (2005). Patents, material transfers, and access to research inputs in biomedical research: Final report to the National Academy of Sciences' Committee Intellectual Property Rights in Genomic and Protein-Related Inventions. Chicago, IL: University of Illinois at Chicago.
57. Walsh J., Cohen W., and Cho C. Where excludability matters: Material versus intellectual property in academic biomedical research. Research Policy 36 (2007) 1184-1203
58. Wesolowsky G. Multiple regression and analysis of variance (1976), John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY
59. Yank V., and Rennie D. Disclosure of researcher contributions: A study of original research articles in the Lancet. Annals of Internal Medicine 130 (1999) 661-670
60. Zuckerman H. Nobel laureates in science: Patterns of productivity, collaboration, and authorship. American Sociological Review 32 (1967) 391-403
61. Zuckerman H. Scientific elite: Nobel laureates in the United States (1996), Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, NJ
62. Zucker L., and Darby M. Star scientists and institutional transformation: Patterns of invention and innovation in the formation of the biotechnology industry. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 93 (1996) 12709-12716
63. Zucker L., and Darby M. Capturing technological opportunity via Japan's star scientists: Evidence from Japanese firm's biotech patents and products. Journal of Technology Transfer 26 (2001) 37-58