This paper examines mentorship as a mechanism for individuals to acquire and develop creativity. More specifically, we study the effect of mentor creativity on protégé creativity and how this... Show moreThis paper examines mentorship as a mechanism for individuals to acquire and develop creativity. More specifically, we study the effect of mentor creativity on protégé creativity and how this effect is moderated by the mentoring styles of autonomy and exploration. Our empirical analysis focuses on formal PhD supervision and training, drawing on survey and bibliometric data for 143 life-science professors (mentors) and their 685 PhD students (protégés). We find that the effect of mentor creativity on protégé creativity is insignificant during protégés’ PhD studies but becomes significantly positive after protégés hold faculty positions, suggesting that the mentorship effect takes time to manifest but is enduring. Furthermore, the effect of mentor creativity on protégé creativity is significant only when protégés have high levels of autonomy and exploration during PhD studies. This suggests the importance of autonomy and exploration in the effective transfer of creativity from mentors to protégés. Show less
Hoogendoorn, B.; Zwan, P.W. van der; Thurik, R. 2020
This paper explores the complex relationship between scientific novelty and technological impact. We measure novel science as publications which make new combinations of prior knowledge, as... Show moreThis paper explores the complex relationship between scientific novelty and technological impact. We measure novel science as publications which make new combinations of prior knowledge, as reflected in new combinations of journals in their references, and trace links between science and technology by scientific references in patent applications. We draw on all the Web of Science SCIE journal articles published in 2001 and all the patents in PATSTAT (October 2013 edition). We find that the small proportion of scientific publications which score on novelty, particularly the 1% highly novel scientific publications in their field, are significantly and sizably more likely to have direct technological impact than comparable non-novel publications. In addition to this superior likelihood of direct impact, novel science also has a higher probability for indirect technological impact, being more likely to be cited by other scientific publications which have technological impact. Among the set of scientific publications cited at least once by patents, there are no additional significant differences in the speed or the intensity of the technological impact between novel and non-novel scientific prior art, but the technological impact from novel science is significantly broader and reaching new technology fields previously not impacted by its scientific discipline. Novel science is also more likely to lead to patents which are themselves novel. Show less
To what extent is scientific research related to societal needs? To answer this crucial question systematically we need to contrast indicators of research priorities with indicators of societal... Show moreTo what extent is scientific research related to societal needs? To answer this crucial question systematically we need to contrast indicators of research priorities with indicators of societal needs. We focus on rice research and technology between 1983 and 2012. We combine quantitative methods that allow investigation of the relation between ‘revealed’ research priorities and ‘revealed’ societal demands, measured respectively by research output (publications) and national accounts of rice use and farmers’ and consumers’ rice-related needs. We employ new bibliometric data, methods and indicators to identify countries’ main rice research topics (priorities) from publications. For a panel of countries, we estimate the relation between revealed research priorities and revealed demands. We find that, across countries and time, societal demands explain a country's research trajectory to a limited extent. Some research priorities are nicely aligned to societal demands, confirming that science is partly related to societal needs. However, we find a relevant number of misalignments between the focus of rice research and revealed demands, crucially related to human consumption and nutrition. We discuss some implications for research policy. Show less
