1,235
Views
15
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

Metrics of Inequality: The Concentration of Resources in the U.S. Biomedical Elite

&

References

  • Atkinson, A. B. (1970) On the measurement of inequality, Journal of Economic Theory, 2(3), pp. 244–263.
  • Azoulay, P., Graff Zivin, J. and Manso, G. (2011) Incentives and creativity: Evidence from the academic life sciences, The RAND Journal of Economics, 42(3), pp. 527–554.
  • Berman, E. P. (2008) The politics of patent law and its material effects: The changing relationship between universities and the marketplace, in: T. J. Pinch and R. Swedberg (Eds) Living in a Material World: Economic Sociology Meets Science and Technology Studies (Inside Technology), pp. 191–213 (Cambridge MA: MIT Press).
  • Birch, K. (2017) Financing technoscience: Finance assetization and rentiership, in: David Tyfield, Rebecca Lave, Samuel Randalls and Charles Thorpe (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of the Political Economy of Science, pp. 169–181 (New York: Routledge).
  • Boyack, K. W. and Jordan, P. (2011) Metrics associated with NIH funding: A high-level view, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 18(4), pp. 423–431.
  • Brembs, B., Button, K. and Munafò, M. (2013) Deep impact: Unintended consequences of journal rank, Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, pp. 291–231.
  • Chawla, D. S. (2017). Who’s the most influential biomedical scientist? Computer program guided by artificial intelligence says it knows. Science. Available at https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/10/who-s-most-influential-biomedical-scientist-computer-program-guided-artificial (accessed 13 November 2019).
  • Chetty, R., Grusky, D., Hell, M., Hendren, N., Manduca, R. and Narang, J. (2017) The fading American dream: Trends in absolute income mobility since 1940, Science, 356(6336), pp. 398–406.
  • Chorus, C. and Waltman, L. (2016) A large-scale analysis of impact factor biased journal self-citations, PLoS One, 11(8), pp. e0161021.
  • Clauset, A., Arbesman, S. and Larremore, D. B. (2015) Systematic inequality and hierarchy in faculty hiring networks, Science Advances, 1(1), pp. e1400005.
  • Cobham, A., Schlögl, L. and Sumner, A. (2016) Inequality and the Tails: The Palma Proposition and Ratio, Global Policy, 7(1), pp. 25–36.
  • Cole, S. and Cole, J. R. (1968) Visibility and the structural bases of awareness of scientific research, American Sociological Review, 33(3), pp. 397–413.
  • Cooper, M. E. (2011) Life as Surplus: Biotechnology and Capitalism in the Neoliberal Era (Seattle: University of Washington Press).
  • Csiszar, A. (2017) How lives became lists and scientific papers became data: Cataloguing authorship during the nineteenth century, The British Journal for the History of Science, 50(1), pp. 23–60.
  • Damgaard, C. and Weiner, J. (2000) Describing inequality in plant size or fecundity, Ecology, 81(4), pp. 1139–1142.
  • Dickson, D. (1984) The New Politics of Science (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
  • Duménil, G. and Lévy, D. (2011) The crisis of neoliberalism (Harvard University Press).
  • Fochler, M. (2016) Variants of epistemic capitalism: Knowledge production and the accumulation of worth in commercial biotechnology and the academic life sciences, Science Technology & Human Values, 41(5), pp. 922–948.
  • Fochler, M., Felt, U. and Müller, R. (2016) Unsustainable growth hyper-competition and worth in life science research: Narrowing evaluative repertoires in doctoral and postdoctoral scientists’ work and lives, Minerva, 54(2), pp. 175–200.
  • Foucault, M. (2008) The Birth of Biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France 1978–1979 (A. I. Davidson and G. Burchell (Eds.)) (New York: Springer).
  • Frey, B. S. (2009) Economists in the PITS?, International Review of Economics, 56(4), pp. 335–346.
  • Galison, P. L. and Stump, D. J. (1996) The Disunity of Science: Boundaries Contexts and Power (Stanford CA: Stanford University Press).
  • Garfield, E. (1955) Citation indexes for science: A new dimension in documentation through association of ideas, Science, 122(3159), pp. 108–111.
  • Garfield, E. (1972) Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation: Journals can be ranked by frequency and impact of citations for science policy studies, Science, 178(4060), pp. 471–479.
  • Gygli, S., Haucap, J., Ruffner, J., Sturm, J.-E. and Südekum, J. (2017). Handelsblatt-Ranking 2.0: Wissenschaftlicher Flexibler Transparenter. Available at http://www.oekonomenstimme.org/artikel/2017/06/handelsblatt-ranking-20-wissenschaftlicher-flexibler-transparenter (accessed 12 November 2019 ).
  • Hackett, E. J. (1990) Science as a vocation in the 1990s: The changing organizational culture of academic science, The Journal of Higher Education, 61(3), pp. 241–279.
  • Hackett, E. J. (2014) Academic capitalism, Science Technology & Human Values, 39(5), pp. 635–638.
  • Halbert, D. J. (2005) Resisting Intellectual Property. RIPE Series in Global Political Economy (New York: Routledge).
  • Hammarfelt, B., de Rijcke, S. D. and Rushforth, A. D. (2016) Quantified academic aelves: The gamification of research through social networking services, Information Research, 21(2), pp. 21–22.
  • Hand, E. (2012) Extra scrutiny for ‘grandee grantees’, Nature, 482(7386), pp. 450–451.
  • Heller, M. A. and Eisenberg, R. S. (1998) Can patents deter innovation? The Anticommons in biomedical research, Science, 280(5364), pp. 698–701.
  • Kaiser, J. (2017a) Data check: Critics challenge NIH finding that bigger labs aren’t necessarily better, Science, 356(6342), pp. 997–997.
  • Kaiser, J. (2017b) Updated: NIH abandons controversial plan to cap grants to big labs creates new fund for younger scientists, Science. Available at https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/06/updated-nih-abandons-controversial-plan-cap-grants-big-labs-creates-new-fund-younger (accessed 13 November 2019).
  • Kleinman, D. L. (2010) The commercialization of academic culture and the future of the university, in: H. Radder (Ed) The Commodification of Academic Research: Science and the Modern University, pp. 24–43 (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press).
  • Kleinman, D. L. and Vallas, S. P. (2001) Science capitalism and the rise of the “knowledge worker": The changing structure of knowledge production in the United States, Theory and Society, 30(4), pp. 451–492.
  • Latour, B. and Woolgar, S. (2013) Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts (Princeton: Princeton University Press).
  • Lauer, M. (2016). Citations per dollar as a measure of productivity. NIH Extramural Nexus April 28. Available at https://nexus.od.nih.gov/all/2016/04/28/citations-per-dollar/ (accessed 12 November 2019).
  • Lave, R., Mirowski, P. and Randalls, S. (2010) Introduction: STS and neoliberal science, Social Studies of Science, 40(5), pp. 659–675.
  • Li, D. and Agha, L. (2015) Big names or big ideas: Do peer-review panels select the best science proposals?, Science, 348(6233), pp. 434–438.
  • Li, D., Azoulay, P. and Sampat, B. N. (2017) The applied value of public investments in biomedical research, Science, 356(6333), pp. 78–81.
  • Maassen, P. and Stensaker, B. (2011) The knowledge triangle European higher education policy logics and policy implications, Higher Education, 61(6), pp. 757–769.
  • Merton, R. K. (1968) The Matthew effect in science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered, Science, 159(3810), pp. 56–63.
  • Mirowski, P. (2011) Science-Mart: Privatizing American Science (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press).
  • Mirowski, P. (2018) The future (s) of open science, Social Studies of Science, 48(2), pp. 171–203.
  • Mirowski, P. and Sent, E. M. (eds.) (2002) Science bought and sold: Essays in the economics of science (University of Chicago Press).
  • Müller, R. (2014) Racing for what? Anticipation and acceleration in the work and career practices of academic life science postdocs, Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 15(3).
  • Müller, R. (2017) Crafting a career in STS: Meaning making assessment and interdisciplinary engagement, Engaging Science Technology and Society, 3, pp. 84–91.
  • Müller, R. and de Rijcke, S. (2017) Exploring the epistemic impacts of academic performance indicators in the life sciences, Research Evaluation, 26(3), pp. 157–168.
  • Müller, R. and Kenney, M. (2014) Agential conversations: Interviewing postdoctoral life scientists and the politics of mundane research practices, Science as Culture, 23(4), pp. 537–559.
  • National Institutes of Health. (2016a) HHS FY2016 budget in brief. Available at https://www.hhs.gov/about/budget/budget-in-brief/nih/index.html#budget (accessed 13 November 2019 ).
  • National Institutes of Health. (2016b) High impact journals: Superfund research program. Available at https://tools.niehs.nih.gov/srp/publications/highimpactjournals.cfm. (accessed 12 November 2019).
  • National Institutes of Health. (2017) Research supplements to promote diversity in health-related research. Available at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-08-190.html (accessed 12 November 2019).
  • National Science Board. (2014) Science and Engineering Indicators (Arlington VA: National Science Foundation).
  • Nik-Khah, E. (2014) Neoliberal pharmaceutical science and the Chicago School of Economics, Social Studies of Science, 44(4), pp. 489–517.
  • Nik-Khah, E. (2017) The “marketplace of ideas” and the centrality of science to neoliberalism, in: David Tyfield, Rebecca Lave, Samuel Randalls and Charles Thorpe (Eds.) The Routledge Handbook of the Political Economy of Science, pp. 54–64 (New York: Routledge).
  • Perry, M. and Reny, P. J. (2016) How to count citations if you must, American Economic Review, 106(9), pp. 2722–2741.
  • Piketty, T. (2014) Capital in the Twenty-First Century (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press).
  • Polster, C. and Newson, J. A. (2015) A Penny for Your Thoughts: How Corporatization Devalues Teaching Research and Public Service in Canada’s Universities (Ottawa: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives).
  • Radder, H. (2010) The commodification of academic research, in: H. Radder (Ed) The Commodification of Academic Research: Science and the Modern University, pp. 1–23 (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press).
  • Sampat, B. and Williams, H. L. (2015) How do patents affect follow-on innovation? Evidence from the human genome, American Economic Review, 109(1), pp. 203–236.
  • Schekman, R. (2013) How journals like nature cell and science are damaging science, The Guardian, 9, pp. 12–23.
  • Sen, A. (1973) On Economic Inequality (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
  • Shapin, S. (2009) The Scientific Life: A Moral History of a Late Modern Vocation (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
  • Sheltzer, J. M. and Smith, J. C. (2014) Elite male faculty in the life sciences employ fewer women, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(28), pp. 10107–10112.
  • Sigl, L. (2012) Embodied anxiety. On experiences of living and coping with (conditions of) precarity in research cultures of the academic life sciences. PhD thesis Doctoral Thesis Department of Science; Technology Studies University of Vienna Austria.
  • Sigl, L. (2016) On the tacit governance of research by uncertainty: How early stage researchers contribute to the governance of life science research, Science Technology & Human Values, 41(3), pp. 347–374.
  • Sinatra, R., Wang, D., Deville, P., Song, C. and Barabási, A.-L. (2016) Quantifying the evolution of individual scientific impact, Science, 354(6312), pp. aaf5239.
  • Sismondo, S. (2009) Ghosts in the machine: publication planning in the medical sciences, Social Studies of Science, 39(2), pp. 171–198.
  • Slaughter, S. and Rhoades, G. (2009) Academic Capitalism and the New Economy: Markets State and Higher Education (Baltimore: JHU Press).
  • Stidham, R. W., Sauder, K. and Higgins, P. D. (2012) Using bibliometrics to advance your academic career, Gastroenterology, 143(3), pp. 520–523.
  • Tyfield, D. (2013) The Economics of Science: A Critical Realist Overview: Volume 1: Illustrations and Philosophical Preliminaries. Ontological Explorations (New York: Routledge).
  • Tyfield, D., Lave, R., Randalls, S. and Thorpe, C. (eds.) (2017) The Routledge Handbook of the Political Economy of Science (Taylor & Francis).
  • van Dijk, D., Manor, O. and Carey, L. B. (2014) Publication metrics and success on the academic job market, Current Biology, 24(11), pp. R516–R517.
  • Veblen, T. (1918) The Higher Learning in America: A Memorandum on the Conduct of Universities by Business Men (New York: B. W. Huebsch).
  • Wadman, M. (2017) Two female scientists sue Salk Institute alleging discrimination at ‘old boys club’ Science. Available at http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/07/two-female-scientists-sue-salk-institute-alleging-discrimination-old-boys-club (accessed 12 November 2019).
  • Wang, D., Song, C. and Barabási, A.-L. (2013) Quantifying long-term scientific impact, Science, 342(6154), pp. 127–132.
  • Zerhouni, E. A. (2006) Research funding. NIH in the post-doubling era: Realities and strategies, Science, 314(5802), pp. 1088–1090.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.