IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-00652485.html

Sequential problem choice and the reward system in the Open Science

Author

Listed:
  • Nicolas Carayol

    (GREThA - Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée - UB - Université de Bordeaux - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Jean-Michel Dalle

    (LPMA - Laboratoire de Probabilités et Modèles Aléatoires - UPMC - Université Pierre et Marie Curie - Paris 6 - UPD7 - Université Paris Diderot - Paris 7 - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

In this paper we present an original model of sequential problem choice within scientific communities. Disciplinary knowledge is accumulated in the form of a growing tree-like web of research areas. Knowledge production is sequential since the problems addressed generate new problems that may in turn be handled. This model allows us to study how the reward system in science influences the scientific community in stochastically selecting problems at each period. Long term evolution and generic features of the emerging disciplines as well as relative efficiency of problem selection are analyzed.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Nicolas Carayol & Jean-Michel Dalle, 2007. "Sequential problem choice and the reward system in the Open Science," Post-Print hal-00652485, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00652485
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Hussler Caroline & Pénin Julien, 2010. "The determinants of scientific research agenda: Why do academic inventors choose to perform patentable versus non-patentable research?," Working Papers of BETA 2010-06, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    2. Nicolas Carayol, 2016. "The Right Job and the Job Right: Novelty, Impact and Journal Stratification in Science," Post-Print hal-02274661, HAL.
    3. Blandinieres, Florence & Pellens, Maikel, 2021. "Scientist's industry engagement and the research agenda: Evidence from Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-001, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    4. Emilio Barucci & Marco Tolotti, 2012. "Identity, reputation and social interaction with an application to sequential voting," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 7(1), pages 79-98, May.
    5. Anita Milman & John M. Marston & Sarah E. Godsey & Jessica Bolson & Holly P. Jones & C. Susan Weiler, 2017. "Scholarly motivations to conduct interdisciplinary climate change research," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 7(2), pages 239-250, June.
    6. Koen Frenken & Luis R. Izquierdo & Paolo Zeppini, 2012. "Recombinant Innovation and Endogenous Transitions," Working Papers 12-01, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies, revised Jan 2012.
    7. Bonaccorsi, Andrea & Vargas, Juan, 2010. "Proliferation dynamics in new sciences," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 1034-1050, October.
    8. Julien Pénin, 2009. "On the consequences of university patenting: What can we learn by asking directly to academic inventors?," Working Papers of BETA 2009-04, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    9. Paul David & Matthijs den Besten & Ralph Schroeder, "undated". "Will e-Science Be Open Science?," Discussion Papers 08-010, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.

    More about this item

    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:hal:journl:hal-00652485. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.