• Login
View Item 
  • DASH Home
  • Harvard Central Administration and University Research Centers
  • Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society Scholarly Articles
  • View Item
  • DASH Home
  • Harvard Central Administration and University Research Centers
  • Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society Scholarly Articles
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Browse

All of DASH
  • Communities & Collections
  • By Issue Date
  • Author
  • Title
  • Keyword
  • FAS Department
This Collection
  • By Issue Date
  • Author
  • Title
  • Keyword

Submitters

  • Login
  • Quick submit
  • Waiver Generator

About

  • About DASH
  • DASH Stories
  • DASH FAQs
  • Accessibility
  • COVID-related Research
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy

Statistics

  • By Schools
  • By Collections
  • By Departments
  • By Items
  • By Country
  • By Authors

On the Biomedical Elite: Inequality and Stasis in Scientific Knowledge Production

 
Thumbnail
View/Open
BKC_Report_KatzMatter2017.pdf (1.659Mb)
Author
Katz, YardenHARVARD
Matter, Ulrich BernhardHARVARD
Metadata
Show full item record
Citation
Katz, Yarden and Ulrich Matter. 2017. On the Biomedical Elite: Inequality and Stasis in Scientific Knowledge Production. Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society Research Publication.
Abstract
Researchers and research institutes are increasingly being evaluated using metrics (from bibliometrics to patent counts), which are core instruments of a longstanding effort to quantify scientific productivity and worth. Here, we examine the relationship between commonly used metrics and funding levels for investigators funded by the National Institutes of Health, the largest public funder of biomedical research in the United States, in the years 1985-2015. We find that funding inequality has been rising since 1985, with a small segment of investigators and institutes getting an increasing proportion of funds, and that investigators who start in the top funding ranks tend to stay there (which results in stasis, or lack of mobility). Furthermore, funding levels are a strong quantitative predictor of the interrelated set of metrics frequently used by economists and policy makers to evaluate scientific research. Our results suggest that the widespread system of metrics favors a minority of elite, highly funded researchers and institutes. Current attempts to “optimize” science are inextricably linked to the concentration of funds in the biomedical research system and are likely to further reduce diversity in the research community.
Terms of Use
This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of-use#LAA
Citable link to this page
http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:33373356

Collections
  • Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society Scholarly Articles [96]

Contact administrator regarding this item (to report mistakes or request changes)

Follow us on TwitterFollow us on FacebookFollow us on Google+

e: osc@harvard.edu

t: +1 (617) 495 4089

f: +1 (617) 495 0370

© 2018 President and Fellows of Harvard College
  • DASH
  • ETDs@Harvard
  • Copyright First Responders
  • HOPE
  • Contact
  • Harvard Library
  • Harvard University