IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v95y2013i3d10.1007_s11192-012-0848-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Creative accomplishments in science: definition, theoretical considerations, examples from science history, and bibliometric findings

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Heinze

    (University of Wuppertal)

Abstract

Science studies have not yet provided a conceptual scheme that distinguishes creative accomplishments from other research contributions. Likewise, there is no commonly agreed typology capturing all important manifestations of innovative science. This article takes up these two desiderata. We argue that scientific creativity springs from the fundamental tension between originality and scientific relevance. Based on this consideration, we introduce a conceptual scheme that singles out creative research accomplishments from other contributions in science. Furthermore, this paper shows that creative contributions are not only advances in theory but also new methods, new empirical phenomena, and the development of new research instrumentation. For illustrative purposes, the article introduces examples from science history and presents results from bibliometric studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Heinze, 2013. "Creative accomplishments in science: definition, theoretical considerations, examples from science history, and bibliometric findings," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(3), pages 927-940, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:95:y:2013:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0848-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0848-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-012-0848-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-012-0848-9?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. Thomas Heinze & Gerrit Bauer, 2007. "Characterizing creative scientists in nano-S&T: Productivity, multidisciplinarity, and network brokerage in a longitudinal perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 811-830, March.
    2. Wolfgang Glänzel & Balázs Schlemmer & Bart Thijs, 2003. "Better late than never? On the chance to become highly cited only beyond the standard bibliometric time horizon," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(3), pages 571-586, November.
    3. Anthony F. J. van Raan, 2004. "Sleeping Beauties in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 59(3), pages 467-472, March.
    4. Richard E. Stern, 1990. "Uncitedness in the biomedical literature," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 41(3), pages 193-196, April.
    5. Juan Miguel Campanario & Erika Acedo, 2007. "Rejecting highly cited papers: The views of scientists who encounter resistance to their discoveries from other scientists," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 58(5), pages 734-743, March.
    6. Juan Miguel Campanario, 2009. "Rejecting and resisting Nobel class discoveries: accounts by Nobel Laureates," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(2), pages 549-565, November.
    7. Howard D. White, 2004. "Reward, persuasion, and the Sokal Hoax: A study in citation identities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 60(1), pages 93-120, May.
    8. repec:ucp:bkecon:9780226750248 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. W Glänzel & E J Rinia & M G M Brocken, 1995. "A bibliometric study of highly cited European physics papers in the 80s," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 113-122, August.
    10. Hendrik P. van Dalen & Kène Henkens, 2004. "Demographers and Their Journals: Who Remains Uncited After Ten Years?," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 30(3), pages 489-506, September.
    11. Dag W Aksnes, 2003. "Characteristics of highly cited papers," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 159-170, December.
    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. Boris Forthmann & Mark A. Runco, 2020. "An Empirical Test of the Inter-Relationships between Various Bibliometric Creative Scholarship Indicators," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-16, June.
    2. Lutz Bornmann & Julian N. Marewski, 2019. "Heuristics as conceptual lens for understanding and studying the usage of bibliometrics in research evaluation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(2), pages 419-459, August.
    3. Kristofer Rolf Söderström, 2023. "The structure and dynamics of instrument collaboration networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3581-3600, June.
    4. Werner Marx & Lutz Bornmann, 2016. "Change of perspective: bibliometrics from the point of view of cited references—a literature overview on approaches to the evaluation of cited references in bibliometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 1397-1415, November.

    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. Rodrigo Costas & Thed N. Leeuwen & Anthony F. J. Raan, 2011. "The “Mendel syndrome” in science: durability of scientific literature and its effects on bibliometric analysis of individual scientists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 177-205, October.
    2. Kosmulski, Marek, 2009. "New seniority-independent Hirsch-type index," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 341-347.
    3. Leo Egghe, 2007. "Probabilities for encountering genius, basic, ordinary or insignificant papers based on the cumulative nth citation distribution," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(1), pages 167-181, January.
    4. Liang, Liming & Zhong, Zhen & Rousseau, Ronald, 2015. "Uncited papers, uncited authors and uncited topics: A case study in library and information science," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 50-58.
    5. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    6. Mingyang Wang & Guang Yu & Shuang An & Daren Yu, 2012. "Discovery of factors influencing citation impact based on a soft fuzzy rough set model," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 635-644, December.
    7. Li, Jiang & Shi, Dongbo & Zhao, Star X. & Ye, Fred Y., 2014. "A study of the “heartbeat spectra” for “sleeping beauties”," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 493-502.
    8. Onodera, Natsuo, 2016. "Properties of an index of citation durability of an article," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 981-1004.
    9. Jiang Li, 2014. "Citation curves of “all-elements-sleeping-beauties”: “flash in the pan” first and then “delayed recognition”," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(2), pages 595-601, August.
    10. Jonathan M. Levitt & Mike Thelwall, 2009. "The most highly cited Library and Information Science articles: Interdisciplinarity, first authors and citation patterns," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 78(1), pages 45-67, January.
    11. Jonathan M. Levitt & Mike Thelwall, 2008. "Patterns of annual citation of highly cited articles and the prediction of their citation ranking: A comparison across subjects," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 77(1), pages 41-60, October.
    12. Jian Wang, 2013. "Citation time window choice for research impact evaluation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 851-872, March.
    13. András Schubert & Wolfgang Glänzel & Gábor Schubert, 2022. "Eponyms in science: famed or framed?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(3), pages 1199-1207, March.
    14. You Song & Fangling Situ & Hongjun Zhu & Jinzhi Lei, 2018. "To be the Prince to wake up Sleeping Beauty: the rediscovery of the delayed recognition studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 9-24, October.
    15. Peter Sjögårde & Fereshteh Didegah, 2022. "The association between topic growth and citation impact of research publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 1903-1921, April.
    16. Hui Fang, 2019. "A transition stage co-citation criterion for identifying the awakeners of sleeping beauty publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 307-322, October.
    17. Aksnes, Dag W. & Rip, Arie, 2009. "Researchers' perceptions of citations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 895-905, July.
    18. Tian Yu & Guang Yu & Peng-Yu Li & Liang Wang, 2014. "Citation impact prediction for scientific papers using stepwise regression analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(2), pages 1233-1252, November.
    19. Helena H. Zhang & Fred Y. Ye, 2020. "Identifying ‘associated-sleeping-beauties’ in ‘swan-groups’ based on small qualified datasets of physics and economics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(3), pages 1525-1537, March.
    20. Glänzel, Wolfgang, 2007. "Characteristic scores and scales," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 92-102.

    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:spr:scient:v:95:y:2013:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0848-9. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.