To assess progress in the social sciences, we should study knowledge cumulation, not disruptiveness

Research output: Working paperWorking papers

Standard

To assess progress in the social sciences, we should study knowledge cumulation, not disruptiveness. / Newig, Jens; Rose, Michael; Aksoy, Zühre et al.
SSRN Social Science Research Network, 2023. p. 1-4.

Research output: Working paperWorking papers

Harvard

Newig, J, Rose, M, Aksoy, Z, Beaudoin, S, Bolognesi, T, Fritsch, O, Hofmann, B, Jager, NW, Kellner, E, Leipold, S, Persson, A, Runhaar, HAC & Webb, R 2023 'To assess progress in the social sciences, we should study knowledge cumulation, not disruptiveness' SSRN Social Science Research Network, pp. 1-4. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4445549

APA

Newig, J., Rose, M., Aksoy, Z., Beaudoin, S., Bolognesi, T., Fritsch, O., Hofmann, B., Jager, N. W., Kellner, E., Leipold, S., Persson, A., Runhaar, H. A. C., & Webb, R. (2023). To assess progress in the social sciences, we should study knowledge cumulation, not disruptiveness. (pp. 1-4). SSRN Social Science Research Network. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4445549

Vancouver

Newig J, Rose M, Aksoy Z, Beaudoin S, Bolognesi T, Fritsch O et al. To assess progress in the social sciences, we should study knowledge cumulation, not disruptiveness. SSRN Social Science Research Network. 2023 May, p. 1-4. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4445549

Bibtex

@techreport{fb9b48cd27e546d9aa6937eb90a809fa,
title = "To assess progress in the social sciences, we should study knowledge cumulation, not disruptiveness",
abstract = "Park, Leahey and Funk – PLF – present a thought-provoking contribution to tracking scientific progress by studying the {\textquoteleft}disruptiveness{\textquoteright} of academic publications and patents in a large-N analysis. Their effort – published in Nature 613 (2023) – is timely because the best possible knowledge is needed to effectively address the grand challenges that societies are facing today, including Earth system changes, human well-being, and justice. Even though the authors' findings show consistency across various scientific disciplines, we argue that (1) their measure of disruptiveness lacks plausibility for the social sciences, and (2) the focus on disruptiveness largely neglects the essence of progress, which is knowledge cumulation. While PLF view knowledge cumulation as a precondition to disruption, we argue that it is knowledge cumulation, rather than disruptiveness, that should be the principal criterion for evaluating scientific progress. ",
author = "Jens Newig and Michael Rose and Z{\"u}hre Aksoy and Simon Beaudoin and Thomas Bolognesi and Oliver Fritsch and Benjamin Hofmann and Jager, {Nicolas Wilhelm} and Elke Kellner and Sina Leipold and Asa Persson and Runhaar, {Hens A. C.} and Robert Webb",
year = "2023",
month = may,
doi = "10.2139/ssrn.4445549",
language = "English",
pages = "1--4",
publisher = "SSRN Social Science Research Network",
type = "WorkingPaper",
institution = "SSRN Social Science Research Network",

}

RIS

TY - UNPB

T1 - To assess progress in the social sciences, we should study knowledge cumulation, not disruptiveness

AU - Newig, Jens

AU - Rose, Michael

AU - Aksoy, Zühre

AU - Beaudoin, Simon

AU - Bolognesi, Thomas

AU - Fritsch, Oliver

AU - Hofmann, Benjamin

AU - Jager, Nicolas Wilhelm

AU - Kellner, Elke

AU - Leipold, Sina

AU - Persson, Asa

AU - Runhaar, Hens A. C.

AU - Webb, Robert

PY - 2023/5

Y1 - 2023/5

N2 - Park, Leahey and Funk – PLF – present a thought-provoking contribution to tracking scientific progress by studying the ‘disruptiveness’ of academic publications and patents in a large-N analysis. Their effort – published in Nature 613 (2023) – is timely because the best possible knowledge is needed to effectively address the grand challenges that societies are facing today, including Earth system changes, human well-being, and justice. Even though the authors' findings show consistency across various scientific disciplines, we argue that (1) their measure of disruptiveness lacks plausibility for the social sciences, and (2) the focus on disruptiveness largely neglects the essence of progress, which is knowledge cumulation. While PLF view knowledge cumulation as a precondition to disruption, we argue that it is knowledge cumulation, rather than disruptiveness, that should be the principal criterion for evaluating scientific progress.

AB - Park, Leahey and Funk – PLF – present a thought-provoking contribution to tracking scientific progress by studying the ‘disruptiveness’ of academic publications and patents in a large-N analysis. Their effort – published in Nature 613 (2023) – is timely because the best possible knowledge is needed to effectively address the grand challenges that societies are facing today, including Earth system changes, human well-being, and justice. Even though the authors' findings show consistency across various scientific disciplines, we argue that (1) their measure of disruptiveness lacks plausibility for the social sciences, and (2) the focus on disruptiveness largely neglects the essence of progress, which is knowledge cumulation. While PLF view knowledge cumulation as a precondition to disruption, we argue that it is knowledge cumulation, rather than disruptiveness, that should be the principal criterion for evaluating scientific progress.

U2 - 10.2139/ssrn.4445549

DO - 10.2139/ssrn.4445549

M3 - Working papers

SP - 1

EP - 4

BT - To assess progress in the social sciences, we should study knowledge cumulation, not disruptiveness

PB - SSRN Social Science Research Network

ER -

DOI

Recently viewed

Publications

  1. Cognitive aspects of noise sensitivity
  2. Wenn Eichhörnchen schreiben…
  3. The contribution of fisheries access agreements to flag State responsibility
  4. Feasibility and efficacy of a digital resilience training
  5. Imagining is Not Observing
  6. Evolution, Empowerment and Emancipation
  7. The well- and unwell-being of a child
  8. Modeling the low-carbon transformation in Europe
  9. Open Innovation Networks
  10. Die Mutter
  11. Comparing Germany and Israel regarding debates on policy-making at the beginning of life: PGD, NIPT and their paths of routinization
  12. Preparation and properties of high purity Mg-Y biomaterials
  13. Konstanz im Wandel?
  14. Notes Toward a Performative Theory of Assembly by Judith Butler . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2015.
  15. Reallabor versus Realexperiment
  16. Students’ genre expectations and the effects of text cohesion on reading comprehension
  17. Solidarität
  18. Stille, Geräusch, Rauschen
  19. Misperceiving bullshit as profound is associated with favorable views of Cruz, Rubio, Trump and conservatism
  20. Public Value
  21. Design und Methode der Studie
  22. Hundert Jahre „transzendentale Obdachlosigkeit“
  23. Patterns of entrepreneurial career development
  24. Microstructural investigations of the Mg-Sn and Mg-Sn-Al alloy systems
  25. Germany
  26. Green in grey
  27. Investigation of food waste valorization through sequential lactic acid fermentative production and anaerobic digestion of fermentation residues
  28. Foreign and Domestic Takeovers in Germany: Cherry-picking and Lemon-grabbing
  29. NAVIGATING PROFESSIONAL CAREERS AND INTERNAL ACTIVISM
  30. Preference for violent electronic games and aggressive behavior among children
  31. "Beach Handball"
  32. The Diversity of environmental justice
  33. Normalisierungen
  34. Empathy-motivated helping
  35. Complexity of traffic scenes and mental workload in car driving