IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v68y2022ics0160791x2200015x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Probability of discoveries between research fields to explain scientific and technological change

Author

Listed:
  • Coccia, Mario

Abstract

One of the fundamental problems in science is the understanding of discovery and innovation process to explain scientific and technological change in society. The study confronts this problem here by analyzing the different probability of unique (singleton) and multiple discoveries between research fields to clarify the inventive behavior in science and technology. The method here supposes that the occurrence of discoveries between research fields follows the Poisson distribution. This probabilistic model is applied to determine the probability of singletons and multiple discoveries, and inventions in medicine and physics that are critical research fields to science and society. We find that, over a period of ten years, the probability that at least one discovery occurs in physics and medicine is a rather similar event (11.1%), whereas the probability that at least two discoveries occur in these research fields is less than 1%, i.e., a very rare event. Results also suggest that the probability of patented inventions in medicine is higher than physics. The different probability of patented inventions in medicine can be mainly due to more opportunistic scholars, scientific institutions and stakeholders, associated with university-industry collaborations to develop inventions and commercialize innovations to solve health problems in society. These findings show the property of heterogeneity in inventive process between research fields and specificity of scientific and technological paths based on nature and scientific ecosystem of each discipline. These characteristics contribute theoretically to extend the theories of scientific change and practically to improve the decision making of policymakers for better allocating resources and supporting scientific planning having a positive societal impact of science.

Suggested Citation

  • Coccia, Mario, 2022. "Probability of discoveries between research fields to explain scientific and technological change," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:68:y:2022:i:c:s0160791x2200015x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.101874
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X2200015X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.101874?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. David C. Stapleton, 1989. "Cohort Size and the Academic Labor Market," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 24(2), pages 221-252.
    2. Ronald G. Ehrenberg, 1991. "A Stock Flow Model of Academic Labor Supply," NBER Chapters, in: Economic Challenges in Higher Education, pages 153-173, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Mario Coccia, 2020. "The evolution of scientific disciplines in applied sciences: dynamics and empirical properties of experimental physics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 451-487, July.
    4. Stephan, Paula E., 2010. "The Economics of Science," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 217-273, Elsevier.
    5. Mario Coccia, 2018. "General properties of the evolution of research fields: a scientometric study of human microbiome, evolutionary robotics and astrobiology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 1265-1283, November.
    6. De Roeck, Albert, 2016. "The probability of discovery," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 13-19.
    7. Mario Coccia, 2001. "Satisfaction, work involvement and R&D performance," International Journal of Human Resources Development and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(2/3/4), pages 268-282.
    8. Coccia, Mario, 2015. "General sources of general purpose technologies in complex societies: Theory of global leadership-driven innovation, warfare and human development," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 199-226.
    9. Coccia, Mario, 2019. "Why do nations produce science advances and new technology?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    10. Min, Chao & Bu, Yi & Sun, Jianjun, 2021. "Predicting scientific breakthroughs based on knowledge structure variations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    11. Adams, James D, 1990. "Fundamental Stocks of Knowledge and Productivity Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(4), pages 673-702, August.
    12. Guindalini, Camila & Verreynne, Martie-Louise & Kastelle, Tim, 2021. "Taking scientific inventions to market: Mapping the academic entrepreneurship ecosystem," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    13. Saeed Roshani & Mohammad-Reza Bagherylooieh & Melika Mosleh & Mario Coccia, 2021. "What is the relationship between research funding and citation-based performance? A comparative analysis between critical disciplines," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7859-7874, September.
    14. Young-Hwan Lee, 2021. "Determinants of research productivity in Korean Universities: the role of research funding," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1462-1486, October.
    15. Katy Börner & Wolfgang Glänzel & Andrea Scharnhorst & Peter Besselaar, 2011. "Modeling science: studying the structure and dynamics of science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 347-348, October.
    16. Bettencourt, Luís M.A. & Kaiser, David I. & Kaur, Jasleen, 2009. "Scientific discovery and topological transitions in collaboration networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 210-221.
    17. Mario Coccia, 2021. "Evolution and structure of research fields driven by crises and environmental threats: the COVID-19 research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9405-9429, December.
    18. Mario COCCIA, 2017. "Disruptive firms and industrial change," Journal of Economic and Social Thought, KSP Journals, vol. 4(4), pages 437-450, December.
    19. Small, Henry, 2018. "Characterizing highly cited method and non-method papers using citation contexts: The role of uncertainty," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 461-480.
    20. Freeman, Richard B, 1975. "Supply and Salary Adjustments to the Changing Science Manpower Market: Physics, 1948-1973," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(1), pages 27-39, March.
    21. Mario Coccia, 2008. "New organisational behaviour of public research institutions: lessons learned from Italian case study," International Journal of Business Innovation and Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(4), pages 402-419.
    22. Small, Henry & Tseng, Hung & Patek, Mike, 2017. "Discovering discoveries: Identifying biomedical discoveries using citation contexts," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 46-62.
    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. Melika Mosleh & Saeed Roshani & Mario Coccia, 2022. "Scientific laws of research funding to support citations and diffusion of knowledge in life science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 1931-1951, April.

    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. Mario Coccia, 2021. "Evolution and structure of research fields driven by crises and environmental threats: the COVID-19 research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9405-9429, December.
    2. Melika Mosleh & Saeed Roshani & Mario Coccia, 2022. "Scientific laws of research funding to support citations and diffusion of knowledge in life science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 1931-1951, April.
    3. Mario Coccia, 2018. "Socioeconomic driving forces of scientific research," Papers 1806.05028, arXiv.org.
    4. Stephan, Paula E., 2010. "The Economics of Science," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 217-273, Elsevier.
    5. Mario Coccia, 2017. "General purpose technologies in dynamic systems: visual representation and analyses of complex drivers," IRCrES Working Paper 201705, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY.
    6. Mario Coccia, 2017. "The relation between typologies of executive and technological performances of nations," IRCrES Working Paper 201701, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY.
    7. Mario Coccia, 2017. "Disruptive technologies and competitive advantage of firms in dynamic markets," IRCrES Working Paper 201704, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY.
    8. Harrison, Richard T., 2023. "W(h)ither entrepreneurship? Discipline, legitimacy and super-wicked problems on the road to nowhere," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 19(C).
    9. Mario Coccia, 2018. "The laws of the evolution of research fields," Papers 1805.03492, arXiv.org.
    10. Min, Chao & Bu, Yi & Sun, Jianjun, 2021. "Predicting scientific breakthroughs based on knowledge structure variations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    11. Coccia, Mario, 2017. "Asymmetric paths of public debts and of general government deficits across countries within and outside the European monetary unification and economic policy of debt dissolution," The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 17-31.
    12. Coccia, Mario, 2020. "Deep learning technology for improving cancer care in society: New directions in cancer imaging driven by artificial intelligence," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    13. Mario Coccia, 2018. "Optimization in R&D intensity and tax on corporate profits for supporting labor productivity of nations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 792-814, June.
    14. Mario Coccia, 2017. "Measurement of Economic Growth, Development and Under Development: New Model and Application," Papers 1704.05015, arXiv.org.
    15. Mario Coccia, 2020. "The evolution of scientific disciplines in applied sciences: dynamics and empirical properties of experimental physics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 451-487, July.
    16. Saeed Roshani & Mohammad-Reza Bagherylooieh & Melika Mosleh & Mario Coccia, 2021. "What is the relationship between research funding and citation-based performance? A comparative analysis between critical disciplines," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7859-7874, September.
    17. Coccia, Mario, 2019. "Why do nations produce science advances and new technology?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    18. Toole, Andrew A. & Czarnitzki, Dirk, 2007. "Life Scientist Mobility from Academe to Industry: Does Academic Entrepreneurship Induce a Costly ?Brain Drain? on the Not-for-Profit Research Sector?," ZEW Discussion Papers 07-072, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    19. Lee Branstetter & Kwon Hyeog Ug, 2004. "The Restructuring Of Japanese Research And Development: The Increasing Impact Of Science On Japanese R&D," Discussion papers 04021, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    20. Maria Rosaria Carillo & Erasmo Papagni, 2004. "Incentive Structure In Basic Research And Economic Growth," Working Papers 9_2004, D.E.S. (Department of Economic Studies), University of Naples "Parthenope", Italy.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Discovery process; Novelty; Scientific breakthrough; Scientific discovery; Scientific change; Dynamics of science; Poisson distribution; Rare event; Research fields; Invention; Technological change;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B30 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought: Individuals - - - General
    • C00 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - General
    • D80 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - General
    • D89 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Other
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • Z00 - Other Special Topics - - General - - - General
    • Z10 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - General
    • Z19 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Other

    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:eee:teinso:v:68:y:2022:i:c:s0160791x2200015x. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    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.