IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v49y2020i1s0048733319302008.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ideas with impact: How connectivity shapes idea diffusion

Author

Listed:
  • Deichmann, Dirk
  • Moser, Christine
  • Birkholz, Julie M.
  • Nerghes, Adina
  • Groenewegen, Peter
  • Wang, Shenghui

Abstract

Despite a growing body of research on idea diffusion, there is a lack of knowledge on why some ideas successfully diffuse and stand out from the crowd while others do not surface or remain unnoticed. We address this question by looking into the characteristics of an idea, specifically its connectivity in a content network. In a content network, ideas connect to other ideas through their content—the words that the ideas have in common. We hypothesize that a high connectivity of an idea in a content network is beneficial for idea diffusion because this idea will more likely be conceived as novel yet at the same time also as more useful because it appears as more familiar to the audience. Moreover, we posit that a high social connectivity of the team working on the idea further enhances the effect of high content connectivity on idea diffusion. Our study focuses on academic conference publications and the co-authorship data of a community of computer science researchers from 2006 to 2012. We find confirmation for our hypotheses and discuss the implications of these findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Deichmann, Dirk & Moser, Christine & Birkholz, Julie M. & Nerghes, Adina & Groenewegen, Peter & Wang, Shenghui, 2020. "Ideas with impact: How connectivity shapes idea diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:49:y:2020:i:1:s0048733319302008
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2019.103881
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733319302008
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2019.103881?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tal Garber & Jacob Goldenberg & Barak Libai & Eitan Muller, 2004. "From Density to Destiny: Using Spatial Dimension of Sales Data for Early Prediction of New Product Success," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 419-428, August.
    2. Boschma, Ron & Heimeriks, Gaston & Balland, Pierre-Alexandre, 2014. "Scientific knowledge dynamics and relatedness in biotech cities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 107-114.
    3. Abbasi, Alireza & Hossain, Liaquat & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2012. "Betweenness centrality as a driver of preferential attachment in the evolution of research collaboration networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 403-412.
    4. Staša Milojević & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Erjia Yan & Ying Ding, 2011. "The cognitive structure of Library and Information Science: Analysis of article title words," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(10), pages 1933-1953, October.
    5. Wang, Jian, 2016. "Knowledge creation in collaboration networks: Effects of tie configuration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 68-80.
    6. Trapido, Denis, 2015. "How novelty in knowledge earns recognition: The role of consistent identities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1488-1500.
    7. Wang, Jian & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Stephan, Paula, 2017. "Bias against novelty in science: A cautionary tale for users of bibliometric indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1416-1436.
    8. Sarah Kaplan & Keyvan Vakili, 2015. "The double-edged sword of recombination in breakthrough innovation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(10), pages 1435-1457, October.
    9. Didegah, Fereshteh & Thelwall, Mike, 2013. "Which factors help authors produce the highest impact research? Collaboration, journal and document properties," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 861-873.
    10. Sorenson, Olav & Fleming, Lee, 2004. "Science and the diffusion of knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1615-1634, December.
    11. Eric Abrahamson & Lori Rosenkopf, 1997. "Social Network Effects on the Extent of Innovation Diffusion: A Computer Simulation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(3), pages 289-309, June.
    12. Gaston Heimeriks & Pierre-Alexandre Balland, 2016. "How smart is specialisation? An analysis of specialisation patterns in knowledge production," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(4), pages 562-574.
    13. Magerman, Tom & Looy, Bart Van & Debackere, Koenraad, 2015. "Does involvement in patenting jeopardize one’s academic footprint? An analysis of patent-paper pairs in biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(9), pages 1702-1713.
    14. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    15. Ray Reagans & Ezra W. Zuckerman, 2001. "Networks, Diversity, and Productivity: The Social Capital of Corporate R&D Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(4), pages 502-517, August.
    16. Maarten Wesel & Sally Wyatt & Jeroen Haaf, 2014. "What a difference a colon makes: how superficial factors influence subsequent citation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(3), pages 1601-1615, March.
    17. Jill E. Perry-Smith & Christina E. Shalley, 2014. "A Social Composition View of Team Creativity: The Role of Member Nationality-Heterogeneous Ties Outside of the Team," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 1434-1452, October.
    18. Fischer, Timo & Henkel, Joachim, 2012. "Patent trolls on markets for technology – An empirical analysis of NPEs’ patent acquisitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1519-1533.
    19. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    20. Jacob Goldenberg & Donald R. Lehmann & David Mazursky, 2001. "The Idea Itself and the Circumstances of Its Emergence as Predictors of New Product Success," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 69-84, January.
    21. Judit Bar-Ilan, 2010. "Web of Science with the Conference Proceedings Citation Indexes: the case of computer science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(3), pages 809-824, June.
    22. Dirk Deichmann & Jan van den Ende, 2014. "Rising from Failure and Learning from Success: The Role of Past Experience in Radical Initiative Taking," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 670-690, June.
    23. Wagner, Caroline S. & Whetsell, Travis A. & Mukherjee, Satyam, 2019. "International research collaboration: Novelty, conventionality, and atypicality in knowledge recombination," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1260-1270.
    24. Lee, You-Na & Walsh, John P. & Wang, Jian, 2015. "Creativity in scientific teams: Unpacking novelty and impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 684-697.
    25. Staša Milojević & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Erjia Yan & Ying Ding, 2011. "The cognitive structure of Library and Information Science: Analysis of article title words," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(10), pages 1933-1953, October.
    26. César Hidalgo & Pierre-Alexandre Balland & Ron Boschma & Mercedes Delgado & Maryann Feldma & Koen Frenken & Edward Glaeser & Canfei He & Dieter F. Kogler & Andrea Morrison & Frank Neffke & David Rigby, 2018. "The Principle of Relatedness," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1830, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jul 2018.
    27. Carla Taramasco & Jean-Philippe Cointet & Camille Roth, 2010. "Academic team formation as evolving hypergraphs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(3), pages 721-740, December.
    28. Mats Alvesson & Jörgen Sandberg, 2013. "Has Management Studies Lost Its Way? Ideas for More Imaginative and Innovative Research," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1), pages 128-152, January.
    29. Dirk Deichmann & Michael Jensen, 2018. "I can do that alone…or not? How idea generators juggle between the pros and cons of teamwork," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 458-475, February.
    30. Peter Mika & Tom Elfring & Peter Groenewegen, 2006. "Application of semantic technology for social network analysis in the sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 68(1), pages 3-27, July.
    31. Battisti, Giuliana & Iona, Alfonsina, 2009. "The intra-firm diffusion of complementary innovations: Evidence from the adoption of management practices by British establishments," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1326-1339, October.
    32. Rik Pieters & Luk Warlop & Michel Wedel, 2002. "Breaking Through the Clutter: Benefits of Advertisement Originality and Familiarity for Brand Attention and Memory," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(6), pages 765-781, June.
    33. Balconi, Margherita & Breschi, Stefano & Lissoni, Francesco, 2004. "Networks of inventors and the role of academia: an exploration of Italian patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 127-145, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Candelon, Bertrand & Joëts, Marc & Mignon, Valérie, 2024. "What makes econometric ideas popular: The role of connectivity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(7).
    2. Takahashi, Carlos Kazunari & Figueiredo, Júlio César Bastos de & Scornavacca, Eusebio, 2024. "Investigating the diffusion of innovation: A comprehensive study of successive diffusion processes through analysis of search trends, patent records, and academic publications," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    3. Loderer, Anja & Muehlfeld, Katrin & Wilken, Robert & Moritz, Alexandra & Slomski, Véronique, 2024. "The language barrier as a springboard towards (team) creativity: An exploratory study of foreign language use in teams," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 33(2).
    4. Mike Thelwall & Kayvan Kousha & Mahshid Abdoli & Emma Stuart & Meiko Makita & Paul Wilson & Jonathan Levitt, 2023. "Why are coauthored academic articles more cited: Higher quality or larger audience?," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 74(7), pages 791-810, July.
    5. Betancourt, Nathan & Jochem, Torsten & Otner, Sarah M.G., 2023. "Standing on the shoulders of giants: How star scientists influence their coauthors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    6. Le Song & Guilong Zhu & Xiao Yin, 2024. "Evaluating the wisdom of scholar crowds from the perspective of knowledge diffusion," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(9), pages 5103-5139, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Candelon, Bertrand & Joëts, Marc & Mignon, Valérie, 2024. "What makes econometric ideas popular: The role of connectivity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(7).
    2. Yue Wang & Ning Li & Bin Zhang & Qian Huang & Jian Wu & Yang Wang, 2023. "The effect of structural holes on producing novel and disruptive research in physics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(3), pages 1801-1823, March.
    3. Dongqing Lyu & Kaile Gong & Xuanmin Ruan & Ying Cheng & Jiang Li, 2021. "Does research collaboration influence the “disruption” of articles? Evidence from neurosciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 287-303, January.
    4. Kuniko Matsumoto & Sotaro Shibayama & Byeongwoo Kang & Masatsura Igami, 2021. "Introducing a novelty indicator for scientific research: validating the knowledge-based combinatorial approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(8), pages 6891-6915, August.
    5. Stefano Bianchini & Moritz Müller & Pierre Pelletier, 2022. "Artificial intelligence in science: An emerging general method of invention," Post-Print hal-03958025, HAL.
    6. Mahmoud Ibrahim Fallatah, 2021. "Innovating in the Desert: a Network Perspective on Knowledge Creation in Developing Countries," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(3), pages 1533-1551, September.
    7. Abbasiharofteh, Milad & Kogler, Dieter F. & Lengyel, Balázs, 2023. "Atypical combinations of technologies in regional co-inventor networks," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 52(10), pages 1-1.
    8. Ron Boschma & Ernest Miguelez & Rosina Moreno & Diego B. Ocampo-Corrales, 2021. "Technological breakthroughs in European regions: the role of related and unrelated combinations," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2118, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jun 2021.
    9. Yan Yan & Shanwu Tian & Jingjing Zhang, 2020. "The impact of a paper’s new combinations and new components on its citation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 895-913, February.
    10. Guan, Jiancheng & Yan, Yan & Zhang, Jing Jing, 2017. "The impact of collaboration and knowledge networks on citations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 407-422.
    11. Bornmann, Lutz & Tekles, Alexander & Zhang, Helena H. & Ye, Fred Y., 2019. "Do we measure novelty when we analyze unusual combinations of cited references? A validation study of bibliometric novelty indicators based on F1000Prime data," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(4).
    12. Wang, Fang, 2024. "Does the recombination of distant scientific knowledge generate valuable inventions? An analysis of pharmaceutical patents," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    13. Brea, Edgar, 2024. "The yin yang of AI: Exploring how commercial and non-commercial orientations shape machine learning innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(6).
    14. Jeongsik “Jay” Lee & Hyun Ju Jung & Hyunwoo Park, 2023. "Rare is beautiful? Rareness, technology value, and the moderating role of search domain and knowledge maturity," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(4), pages 1019-1040, April.
    15. Chen, Wei & Yan, Yan, 2023. "New components and combinations: The perspective of the internal collaboration networks of scientific teams," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2).
    16. Belkhouja, Mustapha & Fattoum, Senda & Yoon, Hyungseok (David), 2021. "Does greater diversification increase individual productivity? The moderating effect of attention allocation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(6).
    17. Libo Sheng & Dongqing Lyu & Xuanmin Ruan & Hongquan Shen & Ying Cheng, 2023. "The association between prior knowledge and the disruption of an article," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4731-4751, August.
    18. Stefano Bianchini & Moritz Muller & Pierre Pelletier, 2020. "Deep Learning in Science," Papers 2009.01575, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2020.
    19. Bianchini, Stefano & Müller, Moritz & Pelletier, Pierre, 2022. "Artificial intelligence in science: An emerging general method of invention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    20. Sotaro Shibayama & Jian Wang, 2020. "Measuring originality in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 409-427, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:49:y:2020:i:1:s0048733319302008. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.