IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Inventing and patenting activities of scientists: in the expectation of money or reputation?

  • Devrim Göktepe-Hulten

    ()

  • Prashanth Mahagaonkar

No abstract is available for this item.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10961-009-9126-2
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Springer in its journal The Journal of Technology Transfer.

Volume (Year): 35 (2010)
Issue (Month): 4 (August)
Pages: 401-423

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:35:y:2010:i:4:p:401-423
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=104998

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Saul Lach & Mark Schankerman, 2007. "Incentives and invention in universities," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 3725, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  2. Merges, Robert P. & Nelson, Richard R., 1994. "On limiting or encouraging rivalry in technical progress: The effect of patent scope decisions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-24, September.
  3. Thursby, Jerry G & Jensen, Richard & Thursby, Marie C, 2001. " Objectives, Characteristics and Outcomes of University Licensing: A Survey of Major U.S. Universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 59-72, January.
  4. Wesley M. Cohen, 2005. "Patents and Appropriation: Concerns and Evidence-super-1," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 30(2_2), pages 57-71, 01.
  5. Levin, Sharon G & Stephan, Paula E, 1991. "Research Productivity over the Life Cycle: Evidence for Academic Scientists," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(1), pages 114-32, March.
  6. repec:now:journl:0300000006 is not listed on IDEAS
  7. Sirilli, Giorgio, 1987. "Patents and inventors: An empirical study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(2-4), pages 157-174, August.
  8. Guido Buenstorf, 2006. "Is Academic Entrepreneurship Good or Bad for Science? Empirical Evidence from the Max Planck Society," Papers on Economics and Evolution 2006-17, Philipps University Marburg, Department of Geography.
  9. Owen-Smith, Jason & Powell, Walter W., 2003. "The expanding role of university patenting in the life sciences: assessing the importance of experience and connectivity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1695-1711, October.
  10. Macdonald, Stuart, 1986. "The distinctive research of the individual inventor," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 199-210, August.
  11. Meyer, M., 2005. "Independent inventors and public support measures: insights from 33 case studies in Finland," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 113-123, June.
  12. Paula Stephan & Sharon Levin, 2005. "Leaving Careers in IT: Gender Differences in Retention," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 383-396, October.
  13. Magnus Gulbrandsen, 2012. "“But Peter’s in it for the money” – the liminality of entrepreneurial scientists," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20120323, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
  14. Phan, Phillip H. & Siegel, Donald S., 2006. "The Effectiveness of University Technology Transfer," Foundations and Trends(R) in Entrepreneurship, now publishers, vol. 2(2), pages 77-144, November.
  15. Frank T. Rothaermel & Shanti D. Agung & Lin Jiang, 2007. "University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 691-791, August.
  16. Blind, Knut & Edler, Jakob & Frietsch, Rainer & Schmoch, Ulrich, 2006. "Motives to patent: Empirical evidence from Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 655-672, June.
  17. Amesse, Fernand & Desranleau, Claude & Etemad, Hamid & Fortier, Yves & Seguin-Dulude, Louise, 1991. "The individual inventor and the role of entrepreneurship : A survey of the Canadian evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 13-27, February.
  18. Jerry G. Thursby & Marie C. Thursby, 2007. "University licensing," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 620-639, Winter.
  19. Etzkowitz, Henry, 1998. "The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 823-833, December.
  20. Paula E. Stephan, 1996. "The Economics of Science," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(3), pages 1199-1235, September.
  21. Donald S. Siegel & Phillip H. Phan, 2004. "Analyzing the Effectiveness of University Technology Transfer: Implications for Entrepreneurship Education," Rensselaer Working Papers in Economics 0426, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Department of Economics.
  22. Klofsten, Magnus & Jones-Evans, Dylan, 2000. " Comparing Academic Entrepreneurship in Europe--The Case of Sweden and Ireland," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 299-309, June.
  23. Gideon D. Markman & Peter T. Gianiodis & Phillip H. Phan & David B. Balkin, 2004. "Entrepreneurship from the Ivory Tower: Do Incentive Systems Matter?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 29(3_4), pages 353-364, 08.
  24. Donald S. Siegel & Reinhilde Veugelers & Mike Wright, 2007. "Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: performance and policy implications," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 640-660, Winter.
  25. Siegel, Donald S. & Waldman, David & Link, Albert, 2003. "Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 27-48, January.
  26. Ajay Agrawal & Rebecca Henderson, 2002. "Putting Patents in Context: Exploring Knowledge Transfer from MIT," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 44-60, January.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:35:y:2010:i:4:p:401-423. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn)

or (Christopher F. Baum)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.