Metrics and Mechanisms: Measuring the Unmeasurable in the Science of Science

What is scientific knowledge, and how is it created, accumulated, transformed, and used? If we want to know the answers to these questions, we need to be able to uncover the structures and mechanisms of science, in addition to the metrics that are easily collectable and quantifiable. In this review article, we link metrics to mechanisms—by demonstrating how emerging metrics not only offer complementaries to the existing metrics, but also shed light on the underlying mechanisms related to ten key quantities of interest in the Science of Science, including discovery significance, finding replicability, knowledge cumulativeness, and beyond. We classify existing theories and findings into three fundamental properties of science: hot and cold science, soft and hard science, fast and slow science. We suggest that curiosity about structure and mechanisms of science since Derek J. de Solla Price, Eugene Garfield, Robert K. Merton and many others complement the zeitgeist in pursuing new, complex metrics without understanding the underlying processes.

[1]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning , 2007 .

[2]  Paula E. Stephan,et al.  Bias Against Novelty in Science: A Cautionary Tale for Users of Bibliometric Indicators , 2016 .

[3]  John Van Reenen,et al.  Are Ideas Getting Harder to Find? , 2017, American Economic Review.

[4]  H V Wyatt,et al.  Knowledge and Prematurity: The Journey from Transformation to DNA , 2015, Perspectives in biology and medicine.

[5]  Russell J. Funk,et al.  Dynamics of Disruption in Science and Technology , 2021, ArXiv.

[6]  Wiebe E. Bijker,et al.  Science in action : how to follow scientists and engineers through society , 1989 .

[7]  Manolis Antonoyiannakis,et al.  Impact Factors and the Central Limit Theorem: Why citation averages are scale dependent , 2018, J. Informetrics.

[8]  Jian Wang,et al.  Bias Against Novelty in Science: A Cautionary Tale for Users of Bibliometric Indicators , 2015 .

[9]  B BARBER,et al.  Resistance by Scientists to Scientific Discovery , 1963 .

[10]  R. Whitley The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences (Second Edition: with new introductory chapter entitled 'Science Transformed? The Changing Nature of Knowledge Production at the End of the Twentieth Century') , 1984 .

[11]  D. Swanson Fish Oil, Raynaud's Syndrome, and Undiscovered Public Knowledge , 2015, Perspectives in biology and medicine.

[12]  Winter A. Mason,et al.  Collaborative learning in networks , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[13]  Dean Keith Simonton,et al.  Multiple discovery and invention: Zeitgeist, genius, or chance? , 1979 .

[14]  D. Hofstadter,et al.  Surfaces and Essences: Analogy as the Fuel and Fire of Thinking , 2013 .

[15]  William S. Cleveland,et al.  Graphs in Scientific Publications , 1984 .

[16]  Benjamin F. Jones,et al.  The dual frontier: Patented inventions and prior scientific advance , 2017, Science.

[17]  D. Baltimore Viral RNA-dependent DNA Polymerase: RNA-dependent DNA Polymerase in Virions of RNA Tumour Viruses , 1970, Nature.

[18]  J. Novak The Theory Underlying Concept Maps and How To Construct Them , 2004 .

[19]  D. Helbing,et al.  How social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[20]  Stasa Milojevic,et al.  Quantifying the cognitive extent of science , 2015, J. Informetrics.

[21]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. , 2010, International journal of surgery.

[22]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions: 50th Anniversary Edition , 2012 .

[23]  Andrey Rzhetsky,et al.  Tradition and Innovation in Scientists’ Research Strategies , 2013, ArXiv.

[24]  E. Hippel Sticky Information and the Locus of Problem Solving: Implications for Innovation , 1994 .

[25]  P. Bourdieu The specificity of the scientific field and the social conditions of the progress of reason , 1975 .

[26]  D J PRICE,et al.  NETWORKS OF SCIENTIFIC PAPERS. , 1965, Science.

[27]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Collective credit allocation in science , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[28]  Norman Kaplan,et al.  The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations , 1974 .

[29]  Katy Börner,et al.  High-impact and transformative science (HITS) metrics: Definition, exemplification, and comparison , 2018, PloS one.

[30]  J. E. Hirsch,et al.  An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output , 2005, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.

[31]  Stasa Milojevic,et al.  How Are Academic Age, Productivity and Collaboration Related to Citing Behavior of Researchers? , 2012, PloS one.

[32]  C A Nelson,et al.  Learning to Learn , 2017, Encyclopedia of Machine Learning and Data Mining.

[33]  Richard A. L. Jones The production of knowledge. , 2008, Nature nanotechnology.

[34]  Katherine W. McCain,et al.  Eponymy and Obliteration by Incorporation: The case of the "Nash Equilibrium" , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[35]  The endless frontier , 1985, Nature.

[36]  B. Cronin,et al.  Obliteration by Incorporation , 2014 .

[37]  Matjaz Perc,et al.  Inheritance patterns in citation networks reveal scientific memes , 2014, ArXiv.

[38]  James A. Evans,et al.  Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology , 2019, Nature.

[39]  Olga Kononova,et al.  Unsupervised word embeddings capture latent knowledge from materials science literature , 2019, Nature.

[40]  Kevin W. Boyack,et al.  Mapping the backbone of science , 2004, Scientometrics.

[41]  Juan Manuel Iranzo Amatriaín,et al.  The sociology of philosophies , 2000 .

[42]  Peter McMahan Ambiguity and Engagement , 2019 .

[43]  D. Helbing,et al.  The Hidden Geometry of Complex, Network-Driven Contagion Phenomena , 2013, Science.

[44]  Luís M. A. Bettencourt,et al.  Invention as a combinatorial process: evidence from US patents , 2014, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[45]  Russell J. Funk,et al.  A Dynamic Network Measure of Technological Change , 2017, Manag. Sci..

[46]  Tang,et al.  Self-Organized Criticality: An Explanation of 1/f Noise , 2011 .

[47]  James A. Tebbe Where Good Ideas Come From: The Natural History of Innovation , 2011 .

[48]  Benjamin F. Jones The Burden of Knowledge and the 'Death of the Renaissance Man': Is Innovation Getting Harder? , 2004 .

[49]  C. Haeussler,et al.  Division of labor in collaborative knowledge production: The role of team size and interdisciplinarity , 2020 .

[50]  E. Salas,et al.  Facilitating Innovation in Diverse Science Teams Through Integrative Capacity , 2012 .

[51]  D. Meyer,et al.  Supporting Online Material Materials and Methods Som Text Figs. S1 to S6 References Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups , 2022 .

[52]  Daniel A. McFarland,et al.  Creative Destruction: The Structural Consequences of Scientific Curation , 2021, American Sociological Review.

[53]  Carl T. Bergstrom,et al.  The Science of Science , 2018, Science.

[54]  A. Brannigan,et al.  Multiple Discoveries in Science: A Test of the Communication Theory , 1983 .

[55]  Jesper W. Schneider,et al.  Mapping scientific frontiers: The quest for knowledge visualization , 2004, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[56]  K. B. Davis,et al.  Bose-Einstein Condensation in a Gas of Sodium Atoms , 1995, EQEC'96. 1996 European Quantum Electronic Conference.

[57]  E. Hook,et al.  Prematurity in Scientific Discovery: On Resistance and Neglect , 2002 .

[58]  A. Telier,et al.  Drawing things together , 2012, INTR.

[59]  Benjamin F. Jones,et al.  Supporting Online Material Materials and Methods Figs. S1 to S3 References the Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge , 2022 .

[60]  Jonathon N. Cummings,et al.  Organization Theory and the Changing Nature of Science , 2014 .

[61]  Rob Kitchin,et al.  The Map Reader: Theories of Mapping Practice and Cartographic Representation , 2011 .

[62]  Christian Catalini,et al.  The incidence and role of negative citations in science , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[63]  Martin Hofmann-Apitius,et al.  ‘HypothesisFinder:’ A Strategy for the Detection of Speculative Statements in Scientific Text , 2013, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[64]  Dafna Shahaf,et al.  Scaling up analogical innovation with crowds and AI , 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[65]  Dafna Shahaf,et al.  31 SOLVENT : A Mixed Initiative System for Finding Analogies between Research Papers , 2018 .

[66]  Paul Nightingale,et al.  الهدم الخلاق Creative Destruction , 2014 .

[67]  Christopher Manning,et al.  Mapping Three Decades of Intellectual Change in Academia , 2020, ArXiv.

[68]  Anthony F. J. van Raan Sleeping beauties cited in patents: Is there also a dormitory of inventions? , 2016, Scientometrics.

[69]  R. Collins,et al.  Why the social sciences won't become high-consensus, rapid-discovery science , 1994 .

[70]  M. Newman,et al.  The structure of scientific collaboration networks. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[71]  K. Dunbar How scientists think: On-line creativity and conceptual change in science. , 1997 .

[72]  M. Polanyi The Republic of science , 1962 .

[73]  R. Merton Social Theory and Social Structure , 1958 .

[74]  Matthew J. Salganik,et al.  Experimental Study of Inequality and Unpredictability in an Artificial Cultural Market , 2006, Science.

[75]  Stephen M Fiore,et al.  The Science of Team Science: A Review of the Empirical Evidence and Research Gaps on Collaboration in Science , 2018, The American psychologist.

[76]  S. Strogatz,et al.  Dynamics on Expanding Spaces: Modeling the Emergence of Novelties , 2017, 1701.00994.

[77]  Yang Wang,et al.  Hot streaks in artistic, cultural, and scientific careers , 2017, Nature.

[78]  J Schüpbach,et al.  Antibodies reactive with human T-lymphotropic retroviruses (HTLV-III) in the serum of patients with AIDS. , 1984, Science.

[79]  Zhen Lei,et al.  Modeling citation dynamics of “atypical” articles , 2018, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[80]  F. Crick,et al.  Molecular Structure of Nucleic Acids: A Structure for Deoxyribose Nucleic Acid , 1974, Nature.

[81]  Daniel Jurafsky,et al.  Measuring the Evolution of a Scientific Field through Citation Frames , 2018, TACL.

[82]  E Garfield,et al.  "Science Citation Index"--A New Dimension in Indexing. , 1964, Science.

[83]  Stephen Cole,et al.  Professional Standing and the Reception of Scientific Discoveries , 1970, American Journal of Sociology.

[84]  Lisa A. Best,et al.  Scientific Graphs and the Hierarchy of the Sciences: , 2000 .

[85]  Kevin W Boyack,et al.  A standardized citation metrics author database annotated for scientific field , 2019, PLoS biology.

[86]  Pierre Azoulay,et al.  Does Science Advance One Funeral at a Time? , 2015, The American economic review.

[87]  J. Moody The Structure of a Social Science Collaboration Network: Disciplinary Cohesion from 1963 to 1999 , 2004 .

[88]  Qing Ke,et al.  Defining and identifying Sleeping Beauties in science , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[89]  D. Price,et al.  Collaboration in an invisible college. , 1966, The American psychologist.

[90]  E. Garfield,et al.  Citation indexes for science. , 1956, Science.

[91]  Margarete Boos,et al.  Mapping the right fit for knowledge sharing. , 2019, Nature.

[92]  Lingfei Wu,et al.  Social Centralization and Semantic Collapse: Hyperbolic Embeddings of Networks and Text , 2020, Poetics.

[93]  Burt V. Bronk,et al.  Hierarchy of sciences , 1977 .

[94]  R. Merton The Matthew effect in science. The reward and communication systems of science are considered. , 1968, Science.

[95]  Daniel A. McFarland,et al.  The Diversity–Innovation Paradox in Science , 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[96]  G. Stent Prematurity and uniqueness in scientific discovery. , 1972, Scientific American.

[97]  Diana Crane,et al.  Invisible colleges. Diffusion of knowledge in scientific communities , 1972, Medical History.

[98]  Yong-Yeol Ahn,et al.  Neural embeddings of scholarly periodicals reveal complex disciplinary organizations , 2021, Science Advances.

[99]  J J Fitzpatrick,et al.  Little science. , 1991, Applied nursing research : ANR.

[100]  Patrick Gaulé,et al.  How Do Travel Costs Shape Collaboration? , 2020, Manag. Sci..

[101]  Pierre Azoulay,et al.  Superstar Extinction , 2008 .

[102]  Uri Shwed,et al.  The Temporal Structure of Scientific Consensus Formation , 2010, American sociological review.

[103]  John P. Walsh,et al.  The bureaucratization of science , 2015 .

[104]  M. Coscia,et al.  Knowledge diffusion in the network of international business travel , 2020, Nature Human Behaviour.

[105]  Amber Williams,et al.  Sleeping Beauties of Science. , 2015, Scientific American.

[106]  S. Redner,et al.  Organization of growing random networks. , 2000, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[107]  E. Garfield,et al.  More Delayed Recognition. Part 2. From Inhibin to Scanning Electron Microscopy , 1990 .

[108]  C. P. Goodman,et al.  The Tacit Dimension , 2003 .

[109]  Carolyn Stein,et al.  Scooped! Estimating Rewards for Priority in Science∗ , 2019 .

[110]  Jay Bhattacharya,et al.  Age and the Trying Out of New Ideas , 2015, Journal of Human Capital.

[111]  D. Simonton Independent Discovery in Science and Technology: A Closer Look at the Poisson Distribution , 1978 .

[112]  Christine M. Beckman,et al.  Prominent but Less Productive: The Impact of Interdisciplinarity on Scientists' Research , 2015 .

[113]  Doug Downey,et al.  High-Precision Extraction of Emerging Concepts from Scientific Literature , 2020, SIGIR.

[114]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Quantifying the evolution of individual scientific impact , 2016, Science.

[115]  Mounir Kehal,et al.  Knowledge Diffusion , 2010, KMIS.

[116]  Alec McGail Lost & Forgotten: An Index of the Famous Works Which Sociology Has Left Behind , 2021, The American Sociologist.

[117]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Quantifying Long-Term Scientific Impact , 2013, Science.

[118]  Christian D. Schunn,et al.  The interplay of conflict and analogy in multidisciplinary teams , 2013, Cognition.

[119]  Woo-Sung Jung,et al.  Quantitative and empirical demonstration of the Matthew effect in a study of career longevity , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[120]  Dashun Wang,et al.  The time dimension of science: Connecting the past to the future , 2017, J. Informetrics.

[121]  Hyejin Youn,et al.  Quantifying simultaneous innovations in evolutionary medicine , 2020, Theory in Biosciences.

[122]  Brian A. Nosek,et al.  Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015 , 2018, Nature Human Behaviour.

[123]  Inga A. Ivanova,et al.  The measurement of “interdisciplinarity” and “synergy” in scientific and extra‐scientific collaborations , 2020 .

[124]  W. Myers,et al.  Atypical Combinations and Scientific Impact , 2013 .

[125]  James A. Evans,et al.  The Delayed Recognition of Scientific Novelty , 2022 .

[126]  César A. Hidalgo,et al.  The Product Space Conditions the Development of Nations , 2007, Science.

[127]  Jason Weston,et al.  Translating Embeddings for Modeling Multi-relational Data , 2013, NIPS.

[128]  Karim R. Lakhani,et al.  Incentives and Problem Uncertainty in Innovation Contests: An Empirical Analysis , 2011, Manag. Sci..

[129]  John P. A. Ioannidis,et al.  A manifesto for reproducible science , 2017, Nature Human Behaviour.

[130]  Daniel A. McFarland,et al.  Measuring Paradigmaticness of Disciplines Using Text , 2016 .

[131]  Yiling Lin,et al.  New directions in science emerge from disconnection and discord , 2022, Journal of Informetrics.

[132]  R. Merton The Matthew Effect in Science , 1968, Science.

[133]  Sanjeev Arora,et al.  Linear Algebraic Structure of Word Senses, with Applications to Polysemy , 2016, TACL.

[134]  Chaomei Chen,et al.  Searching for intellectual turning points: Progressive knowledge domain visualization , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.