IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joevec/v31y2021i5d10.1007_s00191-020-00716-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring network dynamics in science: the formation of ties to knowledge translators in clinical research

Author

Listed:
  • Bastian Rake

    (Maynooth University)

  • Pablo D’Este

    (Universidad Politécnica de Valencia)

  • Maureen McKelvey

    (University of Gothenburg)

Abstract

From an evolutionary economics perspective, knowledge networks are self-organizing systems. Therefore, studying changes of these systems requires an understanding of how such changes are influenced by both the behaviors and characteristics of key individual actors and the network structure. We apply this perspective to a network of investigators (i.e. lead scientists) and a sample of 9543 Phase 2 cancer clinical trials during the period 2002–2012, in order to examine the structure and explore the dynamics of the clinical trial network. Using temporal exponential random graph models, we examine whether preferential attachment, multi-connectivity, or homophily drive the formation of new collaborative relations to knowledge translators - i.e. investigators with basic and clinical research knowledge. Our results suggest that despite some increased connectivity over time the network remains fragmented due to the considerably growing number of investigators in the network. This fragmentation limits opportunities for knowledge transfer to advance clinical trials. We find that homophily in research fields and investigators’ country of affiliation and heterophily in terms of publication output promote the formation of ties to knowledge translators. We find also that multi-connectivity increases the probability of tie formation with knowledge translators while preferential attachment reduces this probability.

Suggested Citation

  • Bastian Rake & Pablo D’Este & Maureen McKelvey, 2021. "Exploring network dynamics in science: the formation of ties to knowledge translators in clinical research," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 1433-1464, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:joevec:v:31:y:2021:i:5:d:10.1007_s00191-020-00716-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s00191-020-00716-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00191-020-00716-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00191-020-00716-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin F. Jones, 2009. "The Burden of Knowledge and the "Death of the Renaissance Man": Is Innovation Getting Harder?," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(1), pages 283-317.
    2. Mario V. Tomasello & Mauro Napoletano & Antonios Garas & Frank Schweitzer, 2017. "The rise and fall of R&D networks," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 26(4), pages 617-646.
    3. Cowan, Robin & Jonard, Nicolas, 2004. "Network structure and the diffusion of knowledge," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 28(8), pages 1557-1575, June.
    4. Jha, Yamini & Welch, Eric W., 2010. "Relational mechanisms governing multifaceted collaborative behavior of academic scientists in six fields of science and engineering," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 1174-1184, November.
    5. Orsenigo, L. & Pammolli, F. & Riccaboni, Massimo, 2001. "Technological change and network dynamics: Lessons from the pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 485-508, March.
    6. Skyler J. Cranmer & Philip Leifeld & Scott D. McClurg & Meredith Rolfe, 2017. "Navigating the Range of Statistical Tools for Inferential Network Analysis," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(1), pages 237-251, January.
    7. Hunter, David R. & Handcock, Mark S. & Butts, Carter T. & Goodreau, Steven M. & Morris, Martina, 2008. "ergm: A Package to Fit, Simulate and Diagnose Exponential-Family Models for Networks," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 24(i03).
    8. Maureen McKelvey & Luigi Orsenigo (ed.), 2006. "The Economics of Biotechnology," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, volume 0, number 3406.
    9. Leila Agha & David Molitor, 2018. "The Local Influence of Pioneer Investigators on Technology Adoption: Evidence from New Cancer Drugs," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(1), pages 29-44, March.
    10. Carolin Haeussler & Bastian Rake, 2017. "The changing geography of clinical research: a critical analysis of its drivers," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 26(2), pages 285-310.
    11. Anckaert, Paul-Emmanuel & Cassiman, David & Cassiman, Bruno, 2020. "Fostering practice-oriented and use-inspired science in biomedical research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    12. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Wang, Jian, 2019. "Scientific novelty and technological impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1362-1372.
    13. Wagner, Caroline S. & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2005. "Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1608-1618, December.
    14. Cantner, Uwe & Rake, Bastian, 2014. "International research networks in pharmaceuticals: Structure and dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 333-348.
    15. Jonathan Adams, 2013. "The fourth age of research," Nature, Nature, vol. 497(7451), pages 557-560, May.
    16. Wang, Jian & Hicks, Diana, 2015. "Scientific teams: Self-assembly, fluidness, and interdependence," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 197-207.
    17. Gittelman, Michelle, 2016. "The revolution re-visited: Clinical and genetics research paradigms and the productivity paradox in drug discovery," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1570-1585.
    18. Ron Boschma & Ron Martin (ed.), 2010. "The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 12864.
    19. Adam M. Kleinbaum & Toby E. Stuart & Michael L. Tushman, 2013. "Discretion Within Constraint: Homophily and Structure in a Formal Organization," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(5), pages 1316-1336, October.
    20. Ron Martin & Peter Sunley, 2006. "Path dependence and regional economic evolution," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(4), pages 395-437, August.
    21. Lindell Bromham & Russell Dinnage & Xia Hua, 2016. "Interdisciplinary research has consistently lower funding success," Nature, Nature, vol. 534(7609), pages 684-687, June.
    22. Boyack, Kevin W. & Patek, Michael & Ungar, Lyle H. & Yoon, Patrick & Klavans, Richard, 2014. "Classification of individual articles from all of science by research level," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12.
    23. Brian Uzzi & Ryon Lancaster, 2003. "Relational Embeddedness and Learning: The Case of Bank Loan Managers and Their Clients," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 383-399, April.
    24. Barabási, A.L & Jeong, H & Néda, Z & Ravasz, E & Schubert, A & Vicsek, T, 2002. "Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 311(3), pages 590-614.
    25. Richard R. Nelson, 1995. "Recent Evolutionary Theorizing about Economic Change," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 48-90, March.
    26. Llopis, Oscar & D’Este, Pablo, 2016. "Beneficiary contact and innovation: The relation between contact with patients and medical innovation under different institutional logics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1512-1523.
    27. Pablo D’Este & Irene Ramos-Vielba & Richard Woolley & Nabil Amara, 2018. "How do researchers generate scientific and societal impacts? Toward an analytical and operational framework," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(6), pages 752-763.
    28. Chenwei Zhang & Yi Bu & Ying Ding & Jian Xu, 2018. "Understanding scientific collaboration: Homophily, transitivity, and preferential attachment," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 69(1), pages 72-86, January.
    29. Phillips, Nelson & Tracey, Paul & Karra, Neri, 2013. "Building entrepreneurial tie portfolios through strategic homophily: The role of narrative identity work in venture creation and early growth," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 134-150.
    30. Bozeman, Barry & Corley, Elizabeth, 2004. "Scientists' collaboration strategies: implications for scientific and technical human capital," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 599-616, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Beniamino Callegari & Christophe Feder, 2022. "The long-term economic effects of pandemics: toward an evolutionary approach [Epidemics and trust: the case of the Spanish flu]," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 31(3), pages 715-735.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Graf, Holger & Kalthaus, Martin, 2018. "International research networks: Determinants of country embeddedness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1198-1214.
    2. Maria Karaulova & Abdullah Gök & Oliver Shackleton & Philip Shapira, 2016. "Science system path-dependencies and their influences: nanotechnology research in Russia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(2), pages 645-670, May.
    3. Laurent R. Bergé, 2017. "Network proximity in the geography of research collaboration," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 96(4), pages 785-815, November.
    4. Maria Tsouri, 2022. "Knowledge networks and strong tie creation: the role of relative network position," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 95-114, January.
    5. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    6. Julia Melkers & Agrita Kiopa, 2010. "The Social Capital of Global Ties in Science: The Added Value of International Collaboration," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 27(4), pages 389-414, July.
    7. Ronnie Ramlogan & Davide Consoli, 2014. "Dynamics of collaborative research medicine: the case of glaucoma," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(4), pages 544-566, August.
    8. Yutao Sun & Kai Liu, 2016. "Proximity effect, preferential attachment and path dependence in inter-regional network: a case of China’s technology transaction," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(1), pages 201-220, July.
    9. Anckaert, Paul-Emmanuel & Cassiman, David & Cassiman, Bruno, 2020. "Fostering practice-oriented and use-inspired science in biomedical research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    10. Holger Graf, 2013. "Inventor Networks in Emerging Key Technologies: Information Technology vs. Semiconductors," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Guido Buenstorf & Uwe Cantner & Horst Hanusch & Michael Hutter & Hans-Walter Lorenz & Fritz Rahmeyer (ed.), The Two Sides of Innovation, edition 127, pages 55-76, Springer.
    11. Maria Tsouri, 2020. "Knowledge Networks and Strong Tie Creation: the Role of Relative Network Position," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2039, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Sep 2020.
    12. Fengchao Liu & Na Zhang & Cong Cao, 2017. "An evolutionary process of global nanotechnology collaboration: a social network analysis of patents at USPTO," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1449-1465, June.
    13. Fontana, Magda & Iori, Martina & Leone Sciabolazza, Valerio & Souza, Daniel, 2022. "The interdisciplinarity dilemma: Public versus private interests," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    14. Wang, Wei & Ren, Jing & Alrashoud, Mubarak & Xia, Feng & Mao, Mengyi & Tolba, Amr, 2020. "Early-stage reciprocity in sustainable scientific collaboration," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3).
    15. Liu Zhi-gao & Dunford Michael, 2012. "Rejuvenating old industries in new contexts," ZFW – Advances in Economic Geography, De Gruyter, vol. 56(1-2), pages 185-202, October.
    16. Gay, Brigitte & Dousset, Bernard, 2005. "Innovation and network structural dynamics: Study of the alliance network of a major sector of the biotechnology industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1457-1475, December.
    17. Cimenler, Oguz & Reeves, Kingsley A. & Skvoretz, John, 2015. "An evaluation of collaborative research in a college of engineering," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 577-590.
    18. Tokmachev, Andrey M., 2023. "Regular collective dynamics of research collaboration," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 610(C).
    19. Winkler Anne E. & Glanzel Wolfang & Levin Sharon & Stephan Paula, 2011. "The Diffusion of Information Technology and the Increased Propensity of Teams to Transcend Institutional and National Borders," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201110, University of Turin.
    20. Rosina Moreno & Ernest Miguélez, 2012. "A Relational Approach To The Geography Of Innovation: A Typology Of Regions," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 492-516, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Network dynamics; Preferential attachment; Homophily; Multi-connectivity; Clinical trials; Knowledge translators;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • D80 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:joevec:v:31:y:2021:i:5:d:10.1007_s00191-020-00716-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.