Scientific teams and networks change the face of knowledge creation

Brian Uzzi, Stefan Wuchty, Jarrett Spiro, Benjamin F. Jones

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

There is an acclaimed tradition in the history and sociology of science that emphasizes the role of the individual genius in scientific discovery (Merton, 1968; Bowler and Morus, 2005). This tradition focuses on the guiding contributions of solitary authors, such as Newton and Einstein, and can be seen broadly in the tendency to equate great ideas with particular names; for example: the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, Euclidean geometry, Nash equilibrium, and Kantian ethics. The role of individual contributions is also celebrated through science's award-granting institutions, like the Nobel Prize Foundation (English, 2005). However, several studies have explored the evident shift in science from this individual-based model of scientific advance to a collaborative model. By building on classic work by Harriet Zuckerman and Robert K. Merton, many authors have established a rising propensity for teamwork in samples of several research fields; with some studies going back a century (Collins, 1998; Cronin et al., 2003; Merton, 1973a; Jones, 2005). For example, Derek de Solla Price examined the change in team size in chemistry from 1910 to 1960, forecasting that by 1980 zero percent of the papers would be written by solo authors (de Solla Price, 1963). According to our research, the mean team size for papers written in chemistry had grown to nearly 3.7 contributors by the year 2000. Recently, Adams et al. (2005) established that teamwork has been increasing over time across broader sets of fields among the most competitive U.S. research universities.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationNetworks in Social Policy Problems
PublisherCambridge University Press
Pages47-59
Number of pages13
ISBN (Print)9780511842481, 9781107009837
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

sociology
ethics
chemistry
Euclidean geometry
forecasting
newton
tendencies
histories
shift

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physics and Astronomy(all)

Cite this

Uzzi, B., Wuchty, S., Spiro, J., & Jones, B. F. (2012). Scientific teams and networks change the face of knowledge creation. In Networks in Social Policy Problems (pp. 47-59). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511842481.003

Scientific teams and networks change the face of knowledge creation. / Uzzi, Brian; Wuchty, Stefan; Spiro, Jarrett; Jones, Benjamin F.

Networks in Social Policy Problems. Cambridge University Press, 2012. p. 47-59.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Uzzi, B, Wuchty, S, Spiro, J & Jones, BF 2012, Scientific teams and networks change the face of knowledge creation. in Networks in Social Policy Problems. Cambridge University Press, pp. 47-59. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511842481.003
Uzzi B, Wuchty S, Spiro J, Jones BF. Scientific teams and networks change the face of knowledge creation. In Networks in Social Policy Problems. Cambridge University Press. 2012. p. 47-59 https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511842481.003
Uzzi, Brian ; Wuchty, Stefan ; Spiro, Jarrett ; Jones, Benjamin F. / Scientific teams and networks change the face of knowledge creation. Networks in Social Policy Problems. Cambridge University Press, 2012. pp. 47-59
@inbook{3f37b938c3074786b5aee9d43c8eda19,
title = "Scientific teams and networks change the face of knowledge creation",
abstract = "There is an acclaimed tradition in the history and sociology of science that emphasizes the role of the individual genius in scientific discovery (Merton, 1968; Bowler and Morus, 2005). This tradition focuses on the guiding contributions of solitary authors, such as Newton and Einstein, and can be seen broadly in the tendency to equate great ideas with particular names; for example: the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, Euclidean geometry, Nash equilibrium, and Kantian ethics. The role of individual contributions is also celebrated through science's award-granting institutions, like the Nobel Prize Foundation (English, 2005). However, several studies have explored the evident shift in science from this individual-based model of scientific advance to a collaborative model. By building on classic work by Harriet Zuckerman and Robert K. Merton, many authors have established a rising propensity for teamwork in samples of several research fields; with some studies going back a century (Collins, 1998; Cronin et al., 2003; Merton, 1973a; Jones, 2005). For example, Derek de Solla Price examined the change in team size in chemistry from 1910 to 1960, forecasting that by 1980 zero percent of the papers would be written by solo authors (de Solla Price, 1963). According to our research, the mean team size for papers written in chemistry had grown to nearly 3.7 contributors by the year 2000. Recently, Adams et al. (2005) established that teamwork has been increasing over time across broader sets of fields among the most competitive U.S. research universities.",
author = "Brian Uzzi and Stefan Wuchty and Jarrett Spiro and Jones, {Benjamin F.}",
year = "2012",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/CBO9780511842481.003",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "9780511842481",
pages = "47--59",
booktitle = "Networks in Social Policy Problems",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Scientific teams and networks change the face of knowledge creation

AU - Uzzi, Brian

AU - Wuchty, Stefan

AU - Spiro, Jarrett

AU - Jones, Benjamin F.

PY - 2012/1/1

Y1 - 2012/1/1

N2 - There is an acclaimed tradition in the history and sociology of science that emphasizes the role of the individual genius in scientific discovery (Merton, 1968; Bowler and Morus, 2005). This tradition focuses on the guiding contributions of solitary authors, such as Newton and Einstein, and can be seen broadly in the tendency to equate great ideas with particular names; for example: the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, Euclidean geometry, Nash equilibrium, and Kantian ethics. The role of individual contributions is also celebrated through science's award-granting institutions, like the Nobel Prize Foundation (English, 2005). However, several studies have explored the evident shift in science from this individual-based model of scientific advance to a collaborative model. By building on classic work by Harriet Zuckerman and Robert K. Merton, many authors have established a rising propensity for teamwork in samples of several research fields; with some studies going back a century (Collins, 1998; Cronin et al., 2003; Merton, 1973a; Jones, 2005). For example, Derek de Solla Price examined the change in team size in chemistry from 1910 to 1960, forecasting that by 1980 zero percent of the papers would be written by solo authors (de Solla Price, 1963). According to our research, the mean team size for papers written in chemistry had grown to nearly 3.7 contributors by the year 2000. Recently, Adams et al. (2005) established that teamwork has been increasing over time across broader sets of fields among the most competitive U.S. research universities.

AB - There is an acclaimed tradition in the history and sociology of science that emphasizes the role of the individual genius in scientific discovery (Merton, 1968; Bowler and Morus, 2005). This tradition focuses on the guiding contributions of solitary authors, such as Newton and Einstein, and can be seen broadly in the tendency to equate great ideas with particular names; for example: the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, Euclidean geometry, Nash equilibrium, and Kantian ethics. The role of individual contributions is also celebrated through science's award-granting institutions, like the Nobel Prize Foundation (English, 2005). However, several studies have explored the evident shift in science from this individual-based model of scientific advance to a collaborative model. By building on classic work by Harriet Zuckerman and Robert K. Merton, many authors have established a rising propensity for teamwork in samples of several research fields; with some studies going back a century (Collins, 1998; Cronin et al., 2003; Merton, 1973a; Jones, 2005). For example, Derek de Solla Price examined the change in team size in chemistry from 1910 to 1960, forecasting that by 1980 zero percent of the papers would be written by solo authors (de Solla Price, 1963). According to our research, the mean team size for papers written in chemistry had grown to nearly 3.7 contributors by the year 2000. Recently, Adams et al. (2005) established that teamwork has been increasing over time across broader sets of fields among the most competitive U.S. research universities.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84923512823&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84923512823&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/CBO9780511842481.003

DO - 10.1017/CBO9780511842481.003

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:84923512823

SN - 9780511842481

SN - 9781107009837

SP - 47

EP - 59

BT - Networks in Social Policy Problems

PB - Cambridge University Press

ER -