• DOI:10.1177/030631295025001008
• Corpus ID: 144949936

The Plight of the Obscure Innovator in Science: A Few Reflections on Campanario's Note

@article{Nissani1995ThePO,
  title={The Plight of the Obscure Innovator in Science: A Few Reflections on Campanario's Note},
  author={Moti Nissani},
  journal={Social Studies of Science},
  year={1995},
  volume={25},
  pages={165 - 183}
}

• Moti Nissani
• Published 1 February 1995
• Education
• Social Studies of Science

The extent of resistance to original contributions of obscure scientists is controversial. Some hold that such resistance is rare, and hence requires little study and no remedy. But others argue that, although not widespread, it happens often enough to merit study and reform. And others again hold it to be common, constituting the single most formidable barrier to scientific advances, and so disturbingly regular as to call for a partial restructuring of the modern scientific enterprise. This Note argues that the controversy cannot be resolved by citation analysis. It then tests one implication of the third view - namely, that a search of the historical and biographical literature should reveal many cases of struggles for publication and recognition that are not usually cited in such discussions. Over 50 cases are suggested, mainly culled from original sources. It is likely that such struggles have many interdependent sociological, political and psychological causes: no overall review is attempted, but one psychological factor is highlighted, and may merit further attention. Given these diverse roadblocks, it may be more surprising that so many scientists appear to have escaped publication and recognition struggles than that some have not. A systematic historical survey is suggested to estimate the incidence of resistance: if this shows that obscurity plus originality often lead to oblivion, the case for reform in science will be strengthened.