Made in Academia: The Effect of Institutional Origin on Inventors’ Attention to Science

References

• Aghion P, Dewatripont M, Stein JC (2008) Academic freedom, private-sector focus, and the process of innovation. RAND J. Econom. 39(3):617–635.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agrawal A, Goldfarb A, Teodoridis F (2016) Understanding the changing structure of scientific inquiry. Amer. Econom. J. Appl. Econom. 8(1):100–128.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Alberts B (2010) Is the frontier really endless? Science 330(6011):1587.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arora A, Belenzon S, Patacconi A (2017) The decline of science in corporate R&D. Strategic Management J. 39(1):3–32.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arrow K (1962) Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. Nelson RR, ed. The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ), 609–625.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Azoulay P (2002) Do pharmaceutical sales respond to scientific evidence? J. Econom. Management Strategy 11(4):551–594.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Azoulay P, Ding WW, Stuart T (2009) The impact of academic patenting on the rate, quality, and direction of (public) research output. J. Indust. Econom. 57(4):637–676.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Azoulay P, Furman JL, Krieger JL, Murray FE (2015) Retractions. Rev. Econom. Statist. 97(5):1118–1136.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Azoulay P, Stuart T, Wang Y (2013) Matthew: Effect or fable? Management Sci. 60(1):92–109.Link, Google Scholar
• Begley CG, Ellis LM (2012) Drug development: Raise standards for preclinical cancer research. Nature 483(7391):531–533.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Begley CG, Ioannidis JPA (2015) Reproducibility in science: Improving the standard for basic and preclinical research. Circ. Res. 116(1):116–126.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Belenzon S, Schankerman M (2013) Spreading the word: Geography, policy, and knowledge spillovers. Rev. Econom. Statist. 95(3):884–903.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bikard M 2012. Simultaneous discoveries as a research tool: Method and promise. Working paper. MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, MA, https://ssrn.com/abstract=2329605.Google Scholar
• Bikard M, Marx M (2018) Hubs as lampposts: Academic location and firms’ attention to science. Scholarly Paper 3006859. Social Science Research Network, Rochester, NY. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3006859.Google Scholar
• Blumenthal D, Campbell EG, Causino N, Louis KS (1996) Participation of life-science faculty in research relationships with industry. New Engl. J. Medicine 335(23):1734–1739.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boudreau KJ, Guinan EC, Lakhani KR, Riedl C (2016) Looking across and looking beyond the knowledge frontier: Intellectual distance, novelty, and resource allocation in science. Management Sci. 62(10):2765–2783.Link, Google Scholar
• Boyack KW, Klavans R, Sorensen AA, Ioannidis JPA (2013) A list of highly influential biomedical researchers, 1996-2011. Eur. J. Clin. Invest. 43(12):1339–1365.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bush V (1945) Science: The endless frontier. Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science (1903-) 48(3):231–264.Google Scholar
• Casadevall A, Fang FC (2012) Reforming science: Methodological and cultural reforms. Infect. Immun. 80(3):891–896.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chai S 2017. Near misses in the breakthrough discovery process. Organ. Sci. 28(3):411–428.Google Scholar
• Chamberlain G (1982) Analysis of Covariance with Qualitative Data (National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Cockburn I, Henderson R (1998) Absorptive capacity, coauthoring behavior, and the organization of research in drug discovery. J. Indust. Econom. 46(2):157–182.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen W, Levinthal D (1990) Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(1):128–152.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen W, Nelson R, Walsh J (2002) Links and impacts: The influence of public research on industrial R&D. Management Sci. 48(1):1–23.Link, Google Scholar
• Cozzens SE (1989) Social Control and Multiple Discovery in Science: The Opiate Receptor Case (SUNY Press, Albany, NY).Google Scholar
• Drahl C (2014) Consecutive journal publications illuminate collaboration and compromise in chemistry. Chemical Engrg. News 92(40):39–41.Google Scholar
• Engelhardt HT, Caplan AL (1987) Scientific Controversies: Case Studies in the Resolution and Closure of Disputes in Science and Technology (Cambridge University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Evans JA (2010) Industry induces academic science to know less about more. Amer. J. Sociol. 116(2):389–452.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fini R, Jourdan J, Perkmann M (2018) Social valuation across multiple audiences: The interplay between ability and identity judgments. Acad. Management J., ePub ahead of print February 20, https://doi.org/amj.2016.0661.Google Scholar
• Fleming L, Sorenson O (2004) Science as a map in technological search. Strategic Management J. 25:909–928.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Freedman LP, Cockburn IM, Simcoe TS (2015) The economics of reproducibility in preclinical research. PLoS Biol. 13(6):e1002165.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Furman J, Jensen K, Murray F (2012) Governing knowledge in the scientific community: Exploring the role of retractions in biomedicine. Res. Policy 41(2):276–290.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Furman J, MacGarvie MJ (2007) Academic science and the birth of industrial research laboratories in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 63(4):756–776.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Furman J, Stern S (2011) Climbing atop the shoulders of giants: The impact of institutions on cumulative research. Amer. Econom. Rev. 101(5):1933–1963.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gambardella A (1992) Competitive advantages from in-house scientific research: The US pharmaceutical industry in the 1980s. Res. Policy 21(5):391–407.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gittelman M, Kogut B (2003) Does good science lead to valuable knowledge? Biotechnology firms and the evolutionary logic of citation patterns. Management Sci. 49(4):366–382.Link, Google Scholar
• Hartshorne JK, Schachner A (2012) Tracking replicability as a method of post-publication open evaluation. Front. Comput. Neurosci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fncom.2012.00008.Google Scholar
• Henderson R, Jaffe A, Trajtenberg M (1998) Universities as a source of commercial technology: A detailed analysis of university patenting, 1965-1988. Rev. Econom. Statist. 80(1):119–127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jones B (2009) The burden of knowledge and the ‘death of the Renaissance man’: Is innovation getting harder? Rev. Econom. Stud. 76(1):283–317.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaplan S, Tripsas M (2008) Thinking about technology: Applying a cognitive lens to technical change. Res. Policy 37(5):790–805.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kuhn, TS (1970) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Lampe R (2012) Strategic citation. Rev. Econom. Statist. 94(1):320–333.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li G-C, Lai R, D’Amour A, Doolin DM, Sun Y, Torvik VI, Yu AZ, Fleming L 2014. Disambiguation and co-authorship networks of the U.S. Patent Inventor Database (1975–2010). Res. Policy 43(6):941–955.Google Scholar
• Merton RK (1957) Priorities in scientific discovery: A chapter in the sociology of science. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 22(6):635–659.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Merton RK (1968) The Matthew Effect in Science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered. Science 159(3810):56–63.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mobley A, Linder SK, Braeuer R, Ellis LM, Zwelling L (2013) A survey on data reproducibility in cancer research provides insights into our limited ability to translate findings from the laboratory to the clinic. PLoS One 8(5):e63221.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mokyr J (2002) The Gifts of Athena: Historical Origins of the Knowledge Economy (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Murmann JP (2003) Knowledge and Competitive Advantage: The Coevolution of Firms, Technology, and National Institutions (Cambridge University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Murray F (2010) The oncomouse that roared: Hybrid exchange strategies as a source of distinction at the boundary of overlapping institutions. Amer. J. Sociol. 116(2):341–388.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Murray F, Kaplan S (2010) Entrepreneurship and the construction of value in biotechnology. Phillips N, Sewell G, Griffiths D, eds. Technology and Organization: Essays in Honour of Joan Woodward, Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Vol. 29 (Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, England), 107–147.Google Scholar
• Nelson R, Winter S (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Ocasio W (1997) Towards an attention-based view of the firm. Strategic Management J. 18:187–206.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oppenheimer JR (1947) Functions of the International Agency in Research and Development. Bull. Atomic Sci. 3(7):173–197.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM, Stuart TE (1995) A role-based ecology of technological change. Amer. J. Sociol. 100(5):1224–1260.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Polanyi M (1958) Personal Knowledge (Routledge, London), http://www.press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/P/bo19722848.html.Google Scholar
• Polidoro F (2013) The competitive implications of certifications: The effects of scientific and regulatory certifications on entries into new technical fields. Acad. Management J. 56(2):597–627.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Polidoro F, Theeke M (2011) Getting competition down to a science: The effects of technological competition on firms’ scientific publications. Organ. Sci. 23(4):1135–1153.Link, Google Scholar
• PubMed (2016) PubMed related citations algorithm. Accessed March 21, 2016, https://ii.nlm.nih.gov/MTI/Details/related.shtml.Google Scholar
• Rao H (2004) Institutional activism in the early American automobile industry. J. Bus. Venturing 19(3):359–384.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roach M, Cohen WM (2013) Lens or prism? Patent citations as a measure of knowledge flows from public research. Management Sci. 59(2):504–525.Link, Google Scholar
• Rosenberg N (1990) Why do firms do basic research (with their own money)? Res. Policy 19(2):165–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosenberg N (1994) Exploring the Black Box: Technology, Economics, and History (Cambridge University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosenberg N, Nelson R (1994) American universities and technical advance in industry. Res. Policy 23(3):323–348.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosenblatt M (2016) An incentive-based approach for improving data reproducibility. Sci. Transl. Med. 8(336):336ed5-336ed5.Google Scholar
• Sauermann H, Stephan P (2013) Conflicting logics? A multidimensional view of industrial and academic science. Organ. Sci. 24(3):889–909.Link, Google Scholar
• Schmookler J (1966) Invention and Economic Growth (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simcoe TS, Waguespack DM (2011) Status, quality, and attention: What’s in a (missing) name? Management Sci. 57(2):274–290.Link, Google Scholar
• Simon H (1947) Administrative Behavior (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Stern S (2004) Do scientists pay to be scientists? Management Sci. 50(6):835–853.Link, Google Scholar
• Stokes DE (1997) Pasteur’s Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation (Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC).Google Scholar
• Teodoridis F (2018) Understanding team knowledge production: The interrelated roles of technology and expertise. Management Sci. 64(8):3625–3648. Google Scholar
• Teodoridis F, Bikard M, Vakili K (2017) The pace of change and creative performance: Specialist and generalist mathematicians at the fall of the Soviet Union. Scholarly Paper 2911141, Social Science Research Network, Rochester, NY. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2911141.Google Scholar
• The Economist (2013) How science goes wrong. (October 19, 2013), http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21588069-scientific-research-has-changed-world-now-it-needs-change-itself-how-science-goes-wrong.Google Scholar
• Verlegh PWJ, Steenkamp J-BEM (1999) A review and meta-analysis of country-of-origin research. J. Econom. Psychol. 20(5):521–546.Crossref, Google Scholar
• von Hippel E (1994) ‘Sticky information’ and the locus of problem solving: Implications for innovation. Management Sci. 40(4):429–439.Link, Google Scholar
• Zucker LG, Darby MR (1996) Star scientists and institutional transformation: Patterns of invention and innovation in the formation of the biotechnology industry. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93(23):12709–12716.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zucker LG, Darby MR, Armstrong JS (2002) Commercializing knowledge: University science, knowledge capture, and firm performance in biotechnology. Management Sci. 48(1):138–153.Link, Google Scholar
• Zucker LG, Darby MR, Brewer MB (1998) Intellectual human capital and the birth of U.S. biotechnology enterprises. Amer. Econom. Rev. 88(1):290–306.Google Scholar