Protein thermodynamics and the cognitive ecology of biomedicine

Abstract Assessments of scientific contributions critically influence decisions about grant funding and academic promotion. Unfortunately, there is a tendency for more junior and less assertive individuals to receive less credit than deserved. Acknowledgement of the complexity of relationships among researchers and the different modes of contributing to scientific progress could improve this situation. The thermodynamics of ligand binding is arguably among the most quantitative and empirically validated theoretical frameworks that permit precise apportionment of “credit” to multiple interacting entities that collectively account for a biologically relevant outcome, in this case, receptor–ligand complex formation. The process for assigning credit for research advances to individual researchers might benefit from emulating this thermodynamic thought process by recognizing that contributions of equal quantitative significance can be of different types and can originate through indirect effects. If the hypothesis that some categories of research contribution are frequently under-valued is correct, then calling attention to this state of affairs and providing an alternative way to conceptualize the task of credit attribution has the potential to begin altering the status quo. A beginning step to improving our credit attribution process would be the empirical investigation of accounts of contributions to particular scientific advances from all research team members.