Abstract

Nobel Laureates in Physiology or Medicine who received the Prize between 1969 and 2011 are compared to a matched group of scientists to examine productivity, impact, coauthorship and international collaboration patterns embedded within research networks. After matching for research domain, h-index, and year of first of publication, we compare bibliometric statistics and network measures. We find that the Laureates produce fewer papers but with higher average citations. The Laureates also produce more sole-authored papers both before and after winning the Prize. The Laureates have a lower number of coauthors across their entire careers than the matched group, but are equally collaborative on average. Further, we find no differences in international collaboration patterns. The Laureates coauthor network reveals significant differences from the non-Laureate network. Laureates are more likely to build bridges across a network when measuring by average degree, density, modularity, and communities. Both the Laureate and non-Laureate networks have “small world” properties, but the Laureates appear to exploit “structural holes” by reaching across the network in a brokerage style that may add social capital to the network. The dynamic may be making the network itself highly attractive and selective. These findings suggest new insights into the role "star scientists" in social networks and the production of scientific discoveries.

Highlights

  • The unique status, posture, and prestige of the Nobel Prize have made it an enduring subject in the sociology of science [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]

  • Nobel Laureates in Physiology or Medicine who received the Prize between 1969 and 2011 are compared to a matched group of scientists to examine productivity, impact, coauthorship and international collaboration patterns embedded within research networks

  • This study explores and identifies the collaborative behavior of scientists embedded within research networks in Physiology or Medicine

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The unique status, posture, and prestige of the Nobel Prize have made it an enduring subject in the sociology of science [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]. According to Alfred Nobel’s will, the Prize should be awarded to those who “shall have conferred the greatest benefit to mankind.”. In Physiology or Medicine the Prize can be shared by up to three scientists each year who have made the most important According to Alfred Nobel’s will, the Prize should be awarded to those who “shall have conferred the greatest benefit to mankind.” In Physiology or Medicine the Prize can be shared by up to three scientists each year who have made the most important

A Network Analysis of Nobel Prize Winners
Network Analysis Results
Discussion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.