Age Differences in the Reception of New Scientific Theories: The Case of Plate Tectonics Theory

Author:

Messeri Peter1

Affiliation:

1. School of Public Health, Division of Sociomedical Sciences, Columbia University, 600 West 168th Street, New York, NY10032, USA.

Abstract

Some studies seem to indicate that age may not be nearly so powerful a factor in structuring scientific disputes as has long been supposed. This paper views the weak and apparently inconsistent empirical associations reported in earlier studies as arising from incomplete analysis of the relationship between age and receptivity to new scientific theories. Explanations as to why age and receptivity might co-vary have focused on motivational factors that reinforce attachments to existing knowledge, overlooking the possibility that the resources which scientists accrue during their careers may well buffer the increased intellectual risk taken in advocating speculative theories. Older scientists may therefore be better positioned than their younger colleagues to speak out earlier in support of new but controversial theories. Age may thus have contradictory effects on receptivity. The hypothesis that the effects of age are mediated by historical changes in prevailing scientific opinion is examined by a quantitative case study of the reception of continental and later plate tectonics theory.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

History and Philosophy of Science,General Social Sciences,History

Cited by 33 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

1. Exploring team creativity: The nexus between freshness and experience;Journal of Informetrics;2024-11

2. Age and the Trying Out of New Ideas;Journal of Human Capital;2019-06

3. Styles of Thought on the Continental Drift Debate;Journal for General Philosophy of Science;2019-02-04

4. Risky Science? Perception and Negotiation of Risk in University Bioscience;Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society;2017-06

5. Outsiders enabling scientific change: learning from the sociohistory of a mathematical proof;Social Epistemology;2017-02-23

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