Can applied science be ‘good science’? Exploring the relationship between patent citations and citation impact in nanoscience

There is a rich literature on how science and technology are related to each other. Patent citation analysis is amongst the most frequently used to tool to track the strengths of links. In this paper we explore the relationship between patent citations and citation impact in nanoscience. Our observations indicate that patent-cited papers perform better in terms of standard bibliometric indicators than comparable publications that are not linked to technology in this way. More specifically, we found that articles cited in patents are more likely to be cited also by other papers. The share of highly cited papers is the most striking result. Instead of the average of 4% of all papers, 13.8% of the papers cited once or twice in patents fall into this category and even 23.5% of the papers more frequently cited in patents receive citation rates far above the standard. Our analyses further demonstrate the presence and the relevance of bandwagon effects driving the development of science and technology.

[1]  D. Price.  Is Technology Historically Independent of Science? A Study in Statistical Historiography , 1965 .

[2]  W. Glänzel,et al.  Scientometric indicators. A 32 country comparison of publication productivity and citation impact , 1985 .

[3]  A. Rip.  Science and technology as dancing partners , 1992 .

[4]  R. Langlois.  Transaction-cost Economics in Real Time , 1992 .

[5]  P. Kroes,et al.  Technological Development and Science in the Industrial Age , 1992 .

[6]  S. Schwartzman,et al.  The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies , 1994 .

[7]  K. Debackere,et al.  Institutional variations in problem choice and persistence among scientists in an emerging field , 1994 .

[8]  Kimberly S. Hamilton,et al.  Linkage between agency-supported research and patented industrial technology , 1995 .

[9]  O. Granstrand,et al.  Multi-Technology Corporations: Why They Have “Distributed” Rather Than “Distinctive Core” Competencies , 1997 .

[10]  D. E. Stokes.  Pasteur's Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation , 1997 .

[11]  Kimberly S. Hamilton,et al.  The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science , 1997 .

[12]  D. Hicks.  360 degree linkage analysis , 2000 .

[13]  M. Meyer.  Does science push technology? Patents citing scientific literature , 2000 .

[14]  K. Pavitt,et al.  Knowledge Specialization, Organizational Coupling, and the Boundaries of the Firm: Why Do Firms Know More than They Make? , 2001 .

[15]  M. Meyer,et al.  Technological generalizations and leitbilder—the anticipation of technological opportunities , 2002 .

[16]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  A Triple Helix of University—Industry—Government Relations , 1998, Scientometrics.

[17]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  Do science-technology interactions pay off when developing technology? , 2004, Scientometrics.

[18]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Publications and patents in nanotechnology , 2003, Scientometrics.

[19]  Michel Zitt,et al.  Patents and Publications , 2004 .

[20]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes , 2004, Scientometrics.

[21]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research: The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies of S&T Systems , 2004 .

[22]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations , 2004, Scientometrics.

[23]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Patents cited in the scientific literature: An exploratory study of 'reverse' citation relations , 2004, Scientometrics.

[24]  Joachim Schummer,et al.  Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology , 2004, Scientometrics.

[25]  Martin S. Meyer,et al.  Patent citation analysis in a novel field of technology:An exploration of nano-science and nano-technology , 2001, Scientometrics.

[26]  Kartik Kumaramangalam,et al.  Does collaborating with academia improve industry science?: Evidence from the UK biotechnology sector, 1988-2001 , 2005, Aslib Proc..

[27]  J. ANTHONYF..  Reference-based publication networks with episodic memories , 2005 .

[28]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  United Germany: The new scientific superpower? , 1990, Scientometrics.

[29]  J. S. Katz,et al.  Scale-Independent Bibliometric Indicators , 2005 .

[30]  Francis Narin,et al.  Is technology becoming science? , 1985, Scientometrics.

[31]  M. Meyer,et al.  Are patenting scientists the better scholars? , 2005, Proceedings. 2005 IEEE International Engineering Management Conference, 2005..

[32]  M. Meyer,et al.  Nanotechnology-interdisciplinarity, patterns of collaboration and differences in application , 1998, Scientometrics.

[33]  Ana B. Descalzo,et al.  The supramolecular chemistry of organic-inorganic hybrid materials. , 2006, Angewandte Chemie.

[34]  A. Geuna,et al.  University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence , 2006 .

[35]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  Scientific capabilities and technological performance of national innovation systems: An exploration of emerging industrial relevant research domains , 2006, Scientometrics.

[36]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Characteristic scores and scales: A bibliometric analysis of subject characteristics based on long-term citation observation , 2007, J. Informetrics.

[37]  N. Islam,et al.  Nanotechnology systems of innovation - An analysis of industry and academia research activities , 2007 .

[38]  W. Glänzel,et al.  Patent and Publication Activities of German Professors: An Empirical Assessment of Their Co-Activity , 2007 .

[39]  Nicola Baldini,et al.  Negative effects of university patenting: Myths and grounded evidence , 2008, Scientometrics.

[40]  Martin Meyer,et al.  What do we know about innovation in nanotechnology? Some propositions about an emerging field between hype and path-dependency , 2007, Scientometrics.

[41]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time , 2009, Scientometrics.

[42]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  Subfield-specific normalized relative indicators and a new generation of relational charts: Methodological foundations illustrated on the assessment of institutional research performance , 2008, Scientometrics.

[43]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  ‘Triad’ or ‘tetrad’? On global changes in a dynamic world , 2008, Scientometrics.

[44]  W. Glänzel,et al.  Heterogeneity of Patenting and Implications for Basic Research , 2009 .

[45]  J. Youtie,et al.  How interdisciplinary is nanotechnology? , 2009, Journal of nanoparticle research : an interdisciplinary forum for nanoscale science and technology.