Laboratory for Innovation Science at Harvard, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA.
TyGeron Institute, Nashville, TN 37220, USA.
Sci Adv. 2018 May 16;4(5):eaar2133. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aar2133. eCollection 2018 May.
On the basis of a survey of 7103 active faculty researchers in nine fields, we examine the extent to which scientists disclose prepublication results, and when they do, why? Except in two fields, more scientists disclose results before publication than not, but there is significant variation in their reasons to disclose, in the frequency of such disclosure, and in withholding crucial results when making public presentations. They disclose results for feedback and credit and to attract collaborators. Particularly in formulaic fields, scientists disclose to attract new researchers to the field independent of collaboration and to deter others from working on their exact problem. A probability model shows that 70% of field variation in disclosure is related to differences in respondent beliefs about norms, competition, and commercialization. Our results suggest new research directions-for example, do the problems addressed or the methods of scientific production themselves shape norms and competition? Are the levels we observe optimal or simply path-dependent? What is the interplay of norms, competition, and commercialization in disclosure and the progress of science?
基于对九个领域的 7103 名在职科研人员的调查,我们考察了科学家公布预发表结果的程度,以及他们公布的原因。除了两个领域,公布预发表结果的科学家多于不公布的,但他们公布的原因、公布的频率以及在公开演讲时隐瞒关键结果存在显著差异。他们公布结果是为了获得反馈和认可,并吸引合作者。特别是在公式化领域,科学家公布结果是为了吸引新的研究人员进入该领域,而不是为了合作,同时也是为了阻止其他人研究自己的具体问题。概率模型显示,70%的披露领域差异与受访者对规范、竞争和商业化的信念差异有关。我们的研究结果表明了新的研究方向,例如,解决的问题或科学生产的方法本身是否会影响规范和竞争?我们观察到的水平是最佳的还是仅仅是路径依赖的?规范、竞争和商业化在披露和科学进步中的相互作用是什么?