IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jas/jasssj/2017-14-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Utility, Impact, Fashion and Lobbying: An Agent-Based Model of the Funding and Epistemic Landscape of Research

Author

Listed:
  • Pawel Sobkowicz

Abstract

The paper presents an agent-based model of an evolution of research interests in a scientific community. The research epistemic/funding landscape is divided into separate domains, which differ in impact on society and the perceived utility, which may determine the public willingness to fund. Scientific domains also differ in their potential for attention grabbing, crucial discoveries, which make them fashionable and also attract funding. The scientists may `follow' the availability of funds via a stylized grant based scheme. The model includes possible effects of the additional public relation and lobbying efforts, promoting certain disciplines at the cost of others. Results are based on two multi-parameter NetLogo models. The first uses an abstract, square lattice topology, and serves as a tool to understand the effects of the parameters describing the individual preferences. The second model, sharing the internal dynamics with the first one, is based on an actual research topics map and projects statistics, derived from the UK Research Council data for 2007--2016. Despite simplifications, results reproduce characteristics of the British research community surprisingly well.

Suggested Citation

  • Pawel Sobkowicz, 2017. "Utility, Impact, Fashion and Lobbying: An Agent-Based Model of the Funding and Epistemic Landscape of Research," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 20(2), pages 1-5.
    • Handle: RePEc:jas:jasssj:2017-14-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jasss.org/20/2/5/5.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Small, Henry & Boyack, Kevin W. & Klavans, Richard, 2014. "Identifying emerging topics in science and technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1450-1467.
    2. Bruce Edmonds & Nigel Gilbert & Petra Ahrweiler & Andrea Scharnhorst, 2011. "Simulating the Social Processes of Science," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 14(4), pages 1-14.
    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. Thomas Feliciani & Junwen Luo & Lai Ma & Pablo Lucas & Flaminio Squazzoni & Ana Marušić & Kalpana Shankar, 2019. "A scoping review of simulation models of peer review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 555-594, October.

    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. Loet Leydesdorff, 2015. "Can intellectual processes in the sciences also be simulated? The anticipation and visualization of possible future states," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 2197-2214, December.
    2. Ali Najmi & Taha H. Rashidi & Alireza Abbasi & S. Travis Waller, 2017. "Reviewing the transport domain: an evolutionary bibliometrics and network analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 843-865, February.
    3. Zhentao Liang & Jin Mao & Kun Lu & Gang Li, 2021. "Finding citations for PubMed: a large-scale comparison between five freely available bibliographic data sources," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9519-9542, December.
    4. Li, Xin & Xie, Qianqian & Jiang, Jiaojiao & Zhou, Yuan & Huang, Lucheng, 2019. "Identifying and monitoring the development trends of emerging technologies using patent analysis and Twitter data mining: The case of perovskite solar cell technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 687-705.
    5. Petros Gkotsis & Antonio Vezzani, 2016. "Technological diffusion as a recombinant process," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation 2016-07, Joint Research Centre.
    6. Li, Menghui & Yang, Liying & Zhang, Huina & Shen, Zhesi & Wu, Chensheng & Wu, Jinshan, 2017. "Do mathematicians, economists and biomedical scientists trace large topics more strongly than physicists?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 598-607.
    7. Ana Teresa Santos & Sandro Mendonça, 2022. "Do papers (really) match journals’ “aims and scope”? A computational assessment of innovation studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7449-7470, December.
    8. Lu, Kun & Yang, Guancan & Wang, Xue, 2022. "Topics emerged in the biomedical field and their characteristics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    9. Bornmann, Lutz & Haunschild, Robin, 2022. "Empirical analysis of recent temporal dynamics of research fields: Annual publications in chemistry and related areas as an example," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    10. Krzysztof Klincewicz, 2016. "The emergent dynamics of a technological research topic: the case of graphene," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(1), pages 319-345, January.
    11. Matthias Held & Grit Laudel & Jochen Gläser, 2021. "Challenges to the validity of topic reconstruction," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 4511-4536, May.
    12. Hötte, Kerstin & Pichler, Anton & Lafond, François, 2021. "The rise of science in low-carbon energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    13. Konstantin Fursov & Alina Kadyrova, 2017. "How the analysis of transitionary references in knowledge networks and their centrality characteristics helps in understanding the genesis of growing technology areas," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1947-1963, June.
    14. Irina V. Efimenko & Vladimir F. Khoroshevsky, 2017. "Peaks, Slopes, Canyons and Plateaus: Identifying Technology Trends Throughout the Life Cycle," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(02), pages 1-28, April.
    15. Amber Geurts & Ralph Gutknecht & Philine Warnke & Arjen Goetheer & Elna Schirrmeister & Babette Bakker & Svetlana Meissner, 2022. "New perspectives for data‐supported foresight: The hybrid AI‐expert approach," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(1), March.
    16. Francisco Grimaldo & Mario Paolucci & Jordi Sabater-Mir, 2018. "Reputation or peer review? The role of outliers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1421-1438, September.
    17. Ki Hong Kim & Young Jae Han & Sugil Lee & Sung Won Cho & Chulung Lee, 2019. "Text Mining for Patent Analysis to Forecast Emerging Technologies in Wireless Power Transfer," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-24, November.
    18. Yoruk, Esin & Radosevic, Slavo & Fischer, Bruno, 2023. "Technological profiles, upgrading and the dynamics of growth: Country-level patterns and trajectories across distinct stages of development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(8).
    19. Lucília Cardoso & Rui Silva & Giovana Goretti Feijó de Almeida & Luís Lima Santos, 2020. "A Bibliometric Model to Analyze Country Research Performance: SciVal Topic Prominence Approach in Tourism, Leisure and Hospitality," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-26, November.
    20. Keungoui Kim & Dieter F. Kogler & Sira Maliphol, 2024. "Identifying interdisciplinary emergence in the science of science: combination of network analysis and BERTopic," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, December.

    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:jas:jasssj:2017-14-1. 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: Francesco Renzini (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.