The Nobel Prize in Natural Science and the Interdisciplinary Research
0
Citation
0
Reference
20
Related Paper
Keywords:
Viewpoints
Natural science
Science studies
Natural Philosophy
Cite
Throughout history, a relatively small number of individuals have made a profound and lasting impact on science and society. Despite long-standing, multi-disciplinary interests in understanding careers of elite scientists, there have been limited attempts for a quantitative, career-level analysis. Here, we leverage a comprehensive dataset we assembled, allowing us to trace the entire career histories of nearly all Nobel laureates in physics, chemistry, and physiology or medicine over the past century. We find that, although Nobel laureates were energetic producers from the outset, producing works that garner unusually high impact, their careers before winning the prize follow relatively similar patterns as ordinary scientists, being characterized by hot streaks and increasing reliance on collaborations. We also uncovered notable variations along their careers, often associated with the Nobel prize, including shifting coauthorship structure in the prize-winning work, and a significant but temporary dip in the impact of work they produce after winning the Nobel. Together, these results document quantitative patterns governing the careers of scientific elites, offering an empirical basis for a deeper understanding of the hallmarks of exceptional careers in science.
Elite
Leverage (statistics)
Discipline
Cite
Citations (97)
Optics has been in the headlines this year due to the UN-sponsored International Year of Light 2015 (IYL 2015), and due to its presence in the 2014 Nobel Prize awards. The purpose of this article is to highlight the innovation-enabling elements that were behind the work of one of the Nobel Laureates - and the stream of innovations that followed, beyond the Nobel work. I will further, from this and my personal experience, expand some thoughts on the enabling elements of academic innovation and draw some conclusions - and, in particular, try and answer the question “How can academic success be repeated?”
Cite
Citations (0)
In the history research of science and technology there exists a phenomenon of making judgment on similar historical events with different standards. This phenomenon happens to the same author with logistic impreciseness and self-contradiction,and different academic views among researchers also result in such phenomenon.The double-standard is unfavorable to the judgment and evaluations on priority identifications for scientific discovery.It is necessary to establish a common standard through academic activities.
Phenomenon
Contradiction
Cite
Citations (0)
The Human Genome Project (HGP) is regarded by many as one of the major scientific achievements in recent science history, a large-scale endeavour that is changing the way in which biomedical research is done and expected, moreover, to yield considerable benefit for society. Thus, since the completion of the human genome sequencing effort, a debate has emerged over the question whether this effort merits to be awarded a Nobel Prize and if so, who should be the one(s) to receive it, as (according to current procedures) no more than three individuals can be selected. In this article, the HGP is taken as a case study to consider the ethical question to what extent it is still possible, in an era of big science, of large-scale consortia and global team work, to acknowledge and reward individual contributions to important breakthroughs in biomedical fields. Is it still viable to single out individuals for their decisive contributions in order to reward them in a fair and convincing way? Whereas the concept of the Nobel prize as such seems to reflect an archetypical view of scientists as solitary researchers who, at a certain point in their careers, make their one decisive discovery, this vision has proven to be problematic from the very outset. Already during the first decade of the Nobel era, Ivan Pavlov was denied the Prize several times before finally receiving it, on the basis of the argument that he had been active as a research manager (a designer and supervisor of research projects) rather than as a researcher himself. The question then is whether, in the case of the HGP, a research effort that involved the contributions of hundreds or even thousands of researchers worldwide, it is still possible to “individualise” the Prize? The “HGP Nobel Prize problem” is regarded as an exemplary issue in current research ethics, highlighting a number of quandaries and trends involved in contemporary life science research practices more broadly.
Excellence
Argument (complex analysis)
Human enhancement
Scientific progress
Cite
Citations (0)
In the modern times,with significant achievements in various research fields,Natural Science has become an umpire to assess the scientific standard.The scientific study of Humanities and Social Science must comply with what the admissive criteria of Science.Social crisis and new scientific exploration,however,led to the challenge of Scientific Natural of Nature Science.Essentialism and rationalism had been questioned,on the other hand,human activities,irrationalism and relativisim have gained the favor.It is time that Humanities and Social Science set up the Scientific Naturefor itself and break away the reliant relationship from Science.
Natural science
Rationalism
Cite
Citations (0)
Scientific prizes confer credibility to persons, ideas, and disciplines, provide financial incentives, and promote community-building celebrations. We examine the growth dynamics and interlocking relationships found in the worldwide scientific prize network. We focus on understanding how the knowledge linkages among prizes and scientists’ propensities for prizewinning relate to knowledge pathways between disciplines and stratification within disciplines. Our data cover more than 3,000 different scientific prizes in diverse disciplines and the career histories of 10,455 prizewinners worldwide for over 100 years. We find several key links between prizes and scientific advances. First, despite an explosive proliferation of prizes over time and across the globe, prizes are more concentrated within a relatively small group of scientific elites, and ties among elites are highly clustered, suggesting that a relatively constrained number of ideas and scholars push the boundaries of science. For example, 64.1% of prizewinners have won two prizes and 13.7% have won five or more prizes. Second, certain prizes strongly interlock disciplines and subdisciplines, creating key pathways by which knowledge spreads and is recognized across science. Third, genealogical and coauthorship networks predict who wins multiple prizes, which helps to explain the interconnectedness among celebrated scientists and their pathbreaking ideas.
Globe
Scientific discovery
Cite
Citations (85)
Phenomenon
Scientific field
Cite
Citations (14)
Science and scientists are often considered too far from common people and too hard to be understood. Nothing is more wrong than this statement but it is true that sometimes there is a gap between the work of the scientists and people. A gap working on both ways even if the scientist is doing research on subjects matching present and future needs of the population and the community is using the practical application of discoveries. Since the end of the 1980’s there is a growing number of events trying to fill this gap and the last d ecade has seen a real effort from the European Community to support events that might be fruitful to make all actors aware of the close link between the scientific and non-scientific communities. “X_Science: Cinema between Science and Science Fiction” is one of these activities organized by the Faculty of Mathematical, Physical and Natural Sciences of the University of Genoa, together with the GenovaFilmFestival and funded by the Liguria Region Governance. The formula is easy: Cinema can act as a catalyst to improve the discussions and therefore the exchange between common people and scientists on topics concerning technology, discoveries, issues, hopes and fears. During X_Science discussions are inspired by SciFi movies from the origins to the most recent productions, with members of the scientific community discussing together with the audience and letting the debate flow in a natural way, like a river where all contributions are synergistically leading to the ocean of awareness. Short movies worldwide produced during the last three years compete for the X_Science Award and allow us to get a glance on the most recent and fresh perceptions of our present and close to far future.
Nothing
Cite
Citations (0)
Both humanists and scientists need to grapple with the ethical and social issues presented by science and technology. Many issues in contemporary politics and social policy derive from the social consequences of and technological developments. The votes of average citizens determine the funding and implementation of many policies that involve science and technology. Nonscientists need to be able to distinguish evidence from political propaganda and pseudoscience. They need to be able to separate genuine data from rhetoric and propaganda used to advocate policy positions. Despite the ever-growing body of knowledge to convey to undergraduates in lectures and laboratories and the increasing importance of science and technology to society, there is even less room in science courses to cover the social issues of science and technology. As a result, more institutions are working to incorporate the sociology and history of science into integrative general education programs for all students. This is not an easy task. In this article, we discuss the imperative for this trend, the banners to integrating the sociology and history of science into the curriculum, and an approach to science studies adopted by the University of Southern Maine at Lewiston-Aubum (USM-LA). In todays world, students are bombarded by claims. Even science majors often lack the conceptual tools to evaluate pseudoscientific claims outside their specialties. In our own teaching, we have encountered physics majors claiming to have magical and psychic powers and senior biochemistry majors who believe in young earth creationism. Additionally, many students have a naive and simplistic conception of the relation of science to technology and lack an understanding of the social, ethical, economic, and political dimensions oi science and technology. Knowledge and skills in the' sciences and in technology are of growing importance in modern life. Colleges struggle to provide an appropriate balance between science and the other disciplines in the curriculum. Likewise, many current revisions of general education stress interdisciplinary approaches and a focus on civic-mindedness. Increased scientific literacy can result from creatively weaving the history, sociology, and philosophy of science and technology' (science studies) throughout general education curricula. The History, Sociology, and Philosophy of Science There are several strands of recent scholarship that can inform efforts to incorporate these important science studies issues into the general education curriculum. Through the study of the history and philosophy of science, students come to realize that there are, in fact, a number of different methods. A historical perspective can teach students that different disciplines today emphasize different methods, systems of logic, and even notions of epistemology than they did in other historical periods. For instance, some sciences have been primarily descriptive, such as natural history or early astronomy. Other sciences have been primarily inductive and experimental: earlier in the history of physics and chemistry and later in biology and psychology. Still other sciences have been primarily deductive, such as earlier celestial mechanics or string theory today. Recent scholarship on the relation between science and technology can also be very useful in these courses. Because of the extent to which an understanding of technology depends on theoretical science, many people assume that technology is simply pure science applied. Students may not understand how social and political concerns influence technological choices and developments or the extent to which technological innovations are the result of tinkering and accident. Finally, arguably the newest and most controversial strand of scholarship is the sociology of knowledge, which builds on the insights of Thomas Kuhn and addresses the role of authority, negotiation, and prestige in the growth of consensus about a fact or theory. …
Pseudoscience
Scientific Literacy
Creationism
Technology and Society
Social Studies
Nature of Science
Cite
Citations (4)
The Journal of the National Science Foundation of Sri Lanka publishes the results of research in all aspects of Science and Technology. The journal also has a website at http://www.nsf.gov.lk/. 2020 Impact Factor: 0.515The JNSF provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
Sri lanka
Foundation (evidence)
Cite
Citations (3)