Diversification versus specialization in scientific research: which strategy pays off?
arXiv:1909.06110 · doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2018.06.010
Abstract
The current work addresses a theme previously unexplored in the literature: that of whether the results arising from research activity in fields other than the scientist's pri-mary field have greater value than the others. Operationally, the authors proceed by identifying: the scientific production of each researcher under observation; field classifi-cation of the publications; the field containing the greatest number of the researcher's publications; attribution of value of each publication. The results show that diversifica-tion at the aggregate level does not pay off, although there are some exceptions at the level of individual disciplines. The implications at policy level are notable. Since the in-centive systems of research organizations are based on the impact of scientific output, the scientists concerned could resist engaging in multidisciplinary projects.
References in corpus (9)
- A heuristic approach to author name disambiguation in bibliometrics databases for large-scale research assessments
- Allocative efficiency in public research funding:can bibliometrics help?
- Assessing the varying level of impact measurement accuracy as a function of the citation window length
- Revisiting the scaling of citations for research assessment
- What is the appropriate length of the publication period over which to assess research performance?
- Do interdisciplinary research teams deliver higher gains to science?
- The effect of multidisciplinary collaborations on research diversification
- The effects of gender, age and academic rank on research diversification
- Specialization vs diversification in research activities: the extent, intensity and relatedness of field diversification by individual scientists