Credit and Priority in Scientific Discovery: A Scientist’s Perspective

  title={Credit and Priority in Scientific Discovery: A Scientist’s Perspective},
  author={Jeffrey S. Flier},
  journal={Perspectives in Biology and Medicine},
  pages={189 - 215}
  • J. Flier
  • Published 1 July 2019
  • Economics
  • Perspectives in Biology and Medicine
ABSTRACT:Credit for scientific discovery plays a central role in the reward structure of science. As the “currency of the realm,” it powerfully influences the norms and institutional practices of the research ecosystem. Though most scientists enter the field for reasons other than desiring credit, once in the field they desire credit for their work. In addition to being a source of pleasure, credit and recognition are necessary for successful careers. The consensus among sociologists… 
Credit Attribution and Collaborative Work
We examine a dynamic model of teamwork in which the public attributes credit for success based on its perception of individual efforts. The collaborative behavior varies starkly depending on the


Collective credit allocation in science
A credit allocation algorithm is developed that captures the coauthors’ contribution to a publication as perceived by the scientific community, reproducing the informal collective credit allocation of science.
Credit Where Credit is Due? The Impact of Project Contributions and Social Factors on Authorship and Inventorship
We examine the extent to which different types of substantive project contributions as well as social factors predict whether a scientist is named as author on a paper and inventor on a patent
The role of the priority rule in science
Science’s priority rule rewards those who are first to make a discovery, at the expense of all other scientists working towards the same goal, no matter how close they may be to making the same
Priority of discovery in the life sciences
The advantages of separating these steps into disclosure via a preprint, and validation via a combination of peer review at a journal and additional evaluation by the wider scientific community are discussed.
The Matilda Effect in science: Awards and prizes in the US, 1990s and 2000s
The research on gender bias in evaluations of research and data from 13 STEM disciplinary societies support the powerful twin influences of implicit bias and committee chairs as contributing factors and sheds light on the relationship of external social factors to women’s science careers.
Credit Where it's Due: The Law and Norms of Attribution
The reputation we develop by receiving credit for the work we do proves to the world the nature of our human capital. If professional reputation were property, it would be the most valuable property
Recognition, reward and responsibility: why the authorship of scientific papers matters.
Not All Scientists pay to be Scientists
A growing body of research on firms’ “open science” strategies rests on the notion that scientists have a strong preference for publishing and that firms are able to extract a wage discount if they
Knowledge in a Scientific Community
In earlier chapters various social aspects of scientific knowledge have been explored. These have been aspects which allow for social evidence to provide scientific knowledge to an individual. The