Bias against Novelty in Science: A Cautionary Tale for Users of Bibliometric Indicators
Research which explores unchartered waters has a high potential for major impact but also carries a higher uncertainty of having impact. Such explorative research is often described as taking a novel approach. This study examines the complex relationship between pursuing a novel approach and impact. Viewing scientific research as a combinatorial process, we measure novelty in science by examining whether a published paper makes first time ever combinations of referenced journals, taking into account the difficulty of making such combinations. We apply this newly developed measure of novelty to all Web of Science research articles published in 2001 across all scientific disciplines. We find that highly novel papers, defined to be those that make more (distant) new combinations, deliver high gains to science: they are more likely to be a top 1% highly cited paper in the long run, to inspire follow on highly cited research, and to be cited in a broader set of disciplines. At the same time, novel research is also more risky, reflected by a higher variance in its citation performance. In addition, we find that novel research is significantly more highly cited in "foreign" fields but not in its "home" field. We also find strong evidence of delayed recognition of novel papers and that novel papers are less likely to be top cited when using a short time window. Finally, novel papers typically are published in journals with a lower than expected Impact Factor. These findings suggest that science policy, in particular funding decisions which rely on traditional bibliometric indicators based on short-term direct citation counts and Journal Impact Factors, may be biased against "high risk/high gain" novel research. The findings also caution against a mono-disciplinary approach in peer review to assess the true value of novel research.
|Date of creation:||Apr 2016|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Centre for Economic Policy Research, 77 Bastwick Street, London EC1V 3PZ.|
Phone: 44 - 20 - 7183 8801
Fax: 44 - 20 - 7183 8820
|Order Information:|| Email: |
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.:
- Adams, James D. & Black, Grant C. & Clemmons, J. Roger & Stephan, Paula E., 2005.
"Scientific teams and institutional collaborations: Evidence from U.S. universities, 1981-1999,"
Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 259-285, April.
- James D. Adams, 2004. "Scientific Teams and Institution Collaborations: Evidence from U.S. Universities, 1981-1999," NBER Working Papers 10640, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bornmann, Lutz & Leydesdorff, Loet & Wang, Jian, 2014. "How to improve the prediction based on citation impact percentiles for years shortly after the publication date?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 175-180.
- James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
- Pierre Azoulay & Joshua S. Graff Zivin & Gustavo Manso, 2011. "Incentives and creativity: evidence from the academic life sciences," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 42(3), pages 527-554, September.
- Pierre Azoulay & Joshua S. Graff Zivin & Gustavo Manso, 2009. "Incentives and Creativity: Evidence from the Academic Life Sciences," NBER Working Papers 15466, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- repec:spr:scient:v:54:y:2002:i:3:d:10.1023_a:1016078331752 is not listed on IDEAS
- Rodrigo Costas & Thed N. van Leeuwen & Anthony F.J. van Raan, 2010. "Is scientific literature subject to a ‘Sell-By-Date’? A general methodology to analyze the ‘durability’ of scientific documents," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(2), pages 329-339, February.
- Costas, Rodrigo & van Leeuwen, Thed N. & van Raan, Anthony F.J., 2013. "Effects of the durability of scientific literature at the group level: Case study of chemistry research groups in the Netherlands," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 886-894.
- Verhoeven, Dennis & Bakker, Jurriën & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2016. "Measuring technological novelty with patent-based indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 707-723.
- Dennis Verhoeven & Jurriën Bakker & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2015. "Measuring technological novelty with patent-based indicators," Working Papers Department of Managerial Economics, Strategy and Innovation (MSI) 501835, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business, Department of Managerial Economics, Strategy and Innovation (MSI).
- Martin L. Weitzman, 1998. "Recombinant Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 113(2), pages 331-360.
- Martin L. Weitzman, 1995. "Recombinant Growth," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1722, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Weitzman, Martin L., 1998. "Recombinant Growth," Scholarly Articles 3708468, Harvard University Department of Economics.
- Chen, Chaomei & Chen, Yue & Horowitz, Mark & Hou, Haiyan & Liu, Zeyuan & Pellegrino, Donald, 2009. "Towards an explanatory and computational theory of scientific discovery," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 191-209.
- Lee, You-Na & Walsh, John P. & Wang, Jian, 2015. "Creativity in scientific teams: Unpacking novelty and impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 684-697.
- repec:spr:scient:v:56:y:2003:i:3:d:10.1023_a:1022378804087 is not listed on IDEAS
- Butler, Linda, 2003. "Explaining Australia's increased share of ISI publications--the effects of a funding formula based on publication counts," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 143-155, January.
- Kevin J. Boudreau & Eva C. Guinan & Karim R. Lakhani & Christoph Riedl, 2016. "Looking Across and Looking Beyond the Knowledge Frontier: Intellectual Distance, Novelty, and Resource Allocation in Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(10), pages 2765-2783, October.
- repec:spr:scient:v:94:y:2013:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0775-9 is not listed on IDEAS
- Hicks, Diana, 2012. "Performance-based university research funding systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 251-261.
- repec:eee:infome:v:11:y:2017:i:3:p:629-644 is not listed on IDEAS
- Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
- Paul M. Romer, 1994. "The Origins of Endogenous Growth," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 3-22, Winter. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:11228. 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: ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.