Scientometric identification of elite 'revolutionary science' research institutions by analysis of trends in Nobel prizes 1947-2006

被引:22
作者
Charlton, Bruce G. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Newcastle, Newcastle Upon Tyne NE1 7RU, Tyne & Wear, England
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.mehy.2006.12.006
中图分类号
R-3 [医学研究方法]; R3 [基础医学];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
Most research is 'normal science' using Thomas Kuhn's term: checking, trial-and-error improvement and incremental extrapolation of already existing paradigms. By contrast, 'revolutionary science' changes the fundamental structures of science by making new theories, discoveries or technologies. Science Nobel prizes (in Physics, Chemistry, Physiology/Medicine and Economics) have the potential to be used as a new metric for measuring revolutionary science. Nobel laureates' nations and research institutions were measured between 1947 and 2006 in 20 year segments. The minimum threshold for inclusion was 3 Nobel prizes. Credit was allocated to each laureate's institution and nation of residence at the time of award. Over 60 years, the USA has 19 institutions which won three-plus Nobel prizes in 20 years, the UK has 4, France has 2 and Sweden and USSR 1 each. Four US institutions won 3 or more prizes in all 20 year segments: Harvard, Stanford, Berkeley and CalTech. The most successful institution in the past 20 years was MIT, with 11 prizes followed by Stanford (9), Columbia and Chicago (7). But the Western United States has recently become the world dominant region for revolutionary science, generating a new generation of elite public universities: University of Colorado at Boulder; University of Washington at Seattle; and the University of California institutions of Santa Barbara, Irvine, UCSF, and UCLA; also the Fred Hutchinson CRC in Seattle. Since 1986 the USA has 16 institutions which have won 3 plus prizes, but elsewhere in the world only the College de France has achieved this. In the UK Cambridge University, Cambridge MRC unit, Oxford and Imperial College have declined from 17 prizes in 1967-86 to only 3 since then. Harvard has also declined as a revolutionary science university from being the top Nobel-prize-winning institution for 40 years, to currently joint sixth position. Although Nobel science prizes are sporadically won by numerous nations and institutions, it seems that long term national strength in revolutionary science is mainly a result of sustaining and newly-generating multi-Nobel-winning research centres. At present these elite institutions are found almost exclusively in the USA. The USA is apparently the only nation with a research system that nurtures revolutionary science on a large scale. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:931 / 934
页数:4
相关论文
共 10 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1986, LITTLE SCI BIG SCI
[2]   The future of 'pure' medical science: The need for a new specialist professional research system [J].
Charlton, BG ;
Andras, P .
MEDICAL HYPOTHESES, 2005, 65 (03) :419-425
[3]  
CHARLTON BG, IN PRESS MINERVA
[4]  
CHARLTON BG, 2006, OXFORD U RES PERFORM
[5]  
CHARLTON BG, IN PRESS MED HYPOTHE
[6]  
Garfield E., 1977, ESSAYS INFORM SCI
[7]  
Kuhn TS, 1970, International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, V2nd
[8]   The US-EU race for leadership of science and technology: Qualitative and quantitative indicators [J].
Shelton, RD ;
Holdridge, GM .
SCIENTOMETRICS, 2004, 60 (03) :353-363
[9]   The emergence of China as a leading nation in science [J].
Zhou, P ;
Leydesdorff, L .
RESEARCH POLICY, 2006, 35 (01) :83-104
[10]  
Ziman J., 2000, REAL SCI