Specific and General Information Sharing Among Competing Academic Researchers

Research Policy (Impact Factor: 2.85). 09/2014; forthcoming. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2013.08.017


We examine information sharing among academics during the research process and show it is context dependent because of differences in trade-offs. When researchers respond to specific requests for information or materials, potential future reciprocity is weighed against the current loss of competitiveness, while general sharing intermediate results in an open forum is driven by the need for feedback versus potential misappropriation. We formally model these trade-offs and empirically test for differences using a survey of German and UK bio-scientists. Increased competition has a negative impact on sharing in both contexts. But career stage has an effect only on specific sharing with untenured faculty less likely to share. Further, scientists in larger teams are more likely to share specifically, but less likely to share generally. The importance of patents for one's reputation reduces sharing in both contexts, but the effect is greater for general information sharing.

Download full-text


Available from: Carolin Häussler, Jun 09, 2014
64 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Summary In this study we explore in detail the causes of corruption in China using two different sets of data at the regional level (provinces and cities). We observe that regions with more anti-corruption efforts, histories of British rule, higher openness, more access to media and relatively higher wages of government employees are markedly less corrupt; while social heterogeneity, regulation, abundance of resource and state- owned enterprises substantially breed regional corruption. Moreover, fiscal decentralization is discovered to depress corruption significantly, while administrative decentralization fosters local corruption. We also find that there is currently a positive relationship between corruption and economic development in China that is mainly driven by the transition to a market economy.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Novel early stage ideas face uncertainty on the expertise needed to elaborate them, which creates a need to circulate them widely to find a match. Yet as information is not excludable, shared ideas may be stolen, reducing incentives to innovate. Still, in idea-rich environments inventors may share them without contractual protection. Idea density is enhanced by firms ensuring rewards to inventors, while their legal boundaries limit idea leakage. As firms limit idea circulation, the innovative environment involves a symbiotic interaction: firms incubate ideas and allow employees to leave if they cannot find an internal fit; markets allow for wide circulation of ideas until matched and completed; under certain circumstances ideas may be even developed in both firms and markets.
    Management Science 05/2010; 57(10). DOI:10.2139/ssrn.1601977 · 2.48 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study uses a sample of Japanese university scientists in life and materials sciences to examine how academic entrepreneurship has affected the norms and behaviors of academic scientists regarding sharing scientific resources. The results indicate that high levels of academic entrepreneurship in a scientific field are associated with less reliance on the gift-giving form of sharing (generalized exchange) traditionally recommended by scientific communities, and with a greater emphasis on direct benefits for givers (direct exchange), as well as a lower overall frequency of sharing. These shifts in sharing behavior are observed even among individual scientists who are not themselves entrepreneurially active, suggesting a general shift in scientific norms contingent on institutional contexts. These findings reflect the contradictions inherent in current science policies that simultaneously encourage open science and commercial application of research results, and suggest that the increasing emphasis on commercial activity may be fundamentally changing the normative structure of science.
    American Sociological Review 09/2012; 77(5-5):804-830. DOI:10.1177/0003122412452874 · 4.42 Impact Factor
Show more