In the race for knowledge, is human capital the most essential element?

Author:

Sinay LauraORCID,Carter Rodney William,de Sinay Maria Cristina Fogliatti

Abstract

AbstractClarivate Analytics, managers of Web of Science, publishes an annual listing of highly cited researchers. The opening sentence of the 2019 report asks “Who would contest that in the race for knowledge, is human capital that is most essential?”. They go on to state that “talent—including intelligence, creativity, ambition, and social competence (where needed)—outpaces other capacities such as access to funding and facilities”. These contradict previous findings, according to which other factors are possibly more influential than human capital. Using Clarivate Analytics’ database for 2018, we investigated which factors are most relevant in development of scientific knowledge. Rather than human capital alone, we found that language, gender, funding, and facilities introduce bias to assessments and possibly prevent talent and discoveries from emerging. We also found that the profile of the highly cited scholars, as established by Clarivate Analytics, is so narrow that it may compromise the validity of scientific knowledge, because it is biased towards the perception and interests of male scholars affiliated with very-highly developed countries where English is commonly spoken and of their sponsors. This highly cited scholars accounted for 76% of the random sample analyzed, absent were women from Latin-America, Africa, Asia, and Oceania, and scholars affiliated with institutions in low-human-developed countries. Also, 98% of the published research came from institutions located in very-highly developed countries. These findings provide evidence that challenges the view that ‘talent is the primary driver of scientific advancement’. This is important because search engines, such as Web of Science, can modify their algorithms to ensure the work of scholars that does not fit the currently dominant profile can have their importance increased so that their findings can more equitably contribute to knowledge development. This, in turn, will increase the validity of scientific inquiry.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

General Economics, Econometrics and Finance,General Psychology,General Social Sciences,General Arts and Humanities,General Business, Management and Accounting

Reference56 articles.

1. Adam D (2002) News feature: the counting house. Nature 415:726–729

2. Agnieszka G, Siudem G, Gagolewski M (2019) Should we introduce a dislike button for academic articles? J Assoc Inf Sci Technol 71:221–229

3. Amano T, González-Var JP, Sutherland WJ (2016) Languages are still a major barrier to global science. PLoS Biol 14:1–8

4. American Society for Cell Biology (2012) San Francisco dEclaration On Research Assessment. https://sfdora.org/read/. Accessed 3 Apr 2019

5. Angermuller J (2017) Accumulating discursive capital, valuating subject positions. From Marx to Foucault. J Crit Discourse Stud 15:414–425

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3