Abstract
In some studies of scientific creativity it has proved useful to assess the differential eminence of scientists according to their presence in historical record (as registered by scholarly works). To determine the research utility of such indicators, a sample of 2026 scientists spanning several centuries and nationalities was taken from three biographical dictionaires of science. The eminence of each scientist was gauged 23 distinct ways using a diversity of reference works (e.g., histories, biographical dictionaires, encyclopedias, etc.) and variable operationalizations (e.g., space measures, ratings, rankings, etc.). Despite minor discrepancies due mainly to the degree of timewise bias and reference work type, a factor analysis demonstrated the existence of a pervasive concensus. A linear composite of these measures had an α reliability of 0.78. Further, it was shown that (a) the reliability of assessed eminence somewhat declines as it is applied to more recently born scientists, (b) the reliability remains high within separate disciplines and nationalities, and (c) assessed eminence, once complex time trends are controlled, correlates positively with the more commonly used citation counts, especially the number of cited publications. Hence, archival indicators of scientific eminence are both reliable and consistent with other scientometric procedures.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
References and Notes
See, for example, W. DENNIS, Bibliographies of Eminent Scientists,Scientific Monthly, 79 (1954), No. 3, 180–183, and D. de SOLLA PRICE,Little Science, Big Science, Columbia University Press, New York, 1963, chap. 2.
For instance, see S. COLE, J. R. COLE, Scientific Output and Recognition: A Study in the Operation of the Reward System in Science,American Sociological Review, 32 (1967), 377–390, and R. L. HELMREICH, J. T. SPENCE, W. R. BEANE, G. W. LUCKER, K. A. MATTHEWS, Making it in Academic Psychology: Demographic and Personality Correlates of Attainment,Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39 (1980), No. 5, 896–908.
For example, see P. D. ALLISON, J. S. LONG, T. K. KRAUZE, Cumulative Advantage and Inequality in Science,American Sociological Review, 47 (1982), 615–625.
F. GALTON,Hereditary Genius, MacMillan, London, 1869.
F. GALTON,English men of science, Macmillan, London, 1874.
A. L. KROEBER,Configurations of Culture Growth. University of Calfiornia Press, Berkeley, 1944.
J. M. CATTELL, A Statistical Study of Eminent Men,Popular Science Monthly, 62 (1903), 359–377.
D. K. SIMONTON, Sociocultural Context of Individual Creativity: A Transhistorical Time-Series Analysis,Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32 (1975), 1119–1133; D. K. SIMONTON, Does Sorokin's Data Support His Theory?: A Study of Generational Fluctuations in Philosophical Beliefs,Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 15 (1976), No. 2, 187–198.
R. K. MERTON, The Matthew Effect in Science,Science, 159 (1968), 56–63.
D. K. SIMONTON, Multiple Discovery and Invention: Zeitgeist, Genius, or Chance?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37 (1979), 1603–1616.
D. K. SIMONTON, The Library Laboratory: Archival Data in Personality and Social Psychology, in L. WHEELER (Ed.),Review of Personality and Social Psychology (Vol. 2), Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, 1981.
This is only strictly true. On the one hand, attempts have been made to evaluate the reliability of aggregate measures of scientific creativity, as in D. K. SIMONTON, Interdisciplinary creativity over Historical Time: A Correlational Analysis of Generational Fluctuations,Social Behavior and Personality, 3 (1975), No. 2, 181–188; D. K. SIMONTON, The Casual Relation between War and Scientific Discovery: An Exploratory Cross-National Analysis,Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 7 (1976), No. 2, 133–144; D. K. SIMONTON, Interdisciplinary and Military Determinants of Scientific Productivity: A Cross-Lagged Correlation Analysis,Journal of Vocational Behavior, 9 (1976), 53–62; D. K. SIMONTON, Techno-Scientific Activity and War: A Yearly Time-Series Analysis, 1300–1903 A. D.,Scientometrics, 2 (1980), 251–255. On the other hand, eminence measures for fields other than science have been shown to be reliable, as in D. K. SIMONTON, Philosophical Eminence, Beliefs, and Zeitgeist: An Individual-Generational Analysis,Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34 (1976), 630–640; D. K. SIMONTON, Eminence, Creativity, and Geographic Marginality: A Recursive Structural Equation Model,Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35 (1977), 805-816.
For a more general answer to this question see D. K. SIMONTON, Biographical Determinants of Achival Eminence: A Multivariate Approach to the Cox Data,Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33 (1976), 218–226.
I. ASIMOV,Biographical Encyclopedia of Science and Technology (New Red. Ed.), Doubleday, Garden City, N. Y., 1972; A. V. HOWARD,Chambers Dictionary of Scientists, Dutton, New York, 1951; T. I. WILLIAMS, (Ed.),A Biographical Dictionary of Scientist's (2nd ed.), Wiley, New York, 1974.
op. cit., note 14.
op. cit., note 14.
Concise Dictionary of Scientific Biography, Scribner's, New York, 1981.
A. G. DEBUS, (Ed.),World Who's Who in Science, Marquis, Who's Who, Chicago, 1968.
P. LENARD,Great Men of Science, H. S.Hartfield trans., MacMillan, New York, 1933.
op. cit., note 14.
I. ASIMOV,Biographical Encyclopaedia of Science and Technology, Doubleday, Garden City, N. Y., 1964. One of the reasons why this source was used in addition to the second edition is that only this first edition made fine distinctions between major and subsidary entries for scientists.
J. E. GREENE, (Ed.),100 great scientists, Pocket Books, New York, 1964.
S. F. MASON,A History of the Sciences (New Rev. Ed.), Collier Books, New York, 1962.
N. ABBAGNANO, (Ed.),Storia delle Scienze, Unione Tipoyrafico, Torino, 1962.
M. DAUMAS, (Ed.),Encyclopedie de la Pleiade: Histoire de la Science, Librairie Gallimard, Paris, 1957.
H. E. BARNES,An Intellectual and Cultural History of the Western World, (3rd rev. ed.), Dover, New York, 1965.
Encyclopaedia Britannica (15th ed.), Encyclopaedia Britannica, Chicago, 1974.
For another use of this in measuring scientific eminence, seeSimonton, op. cit., note 10.
R. HUTCHINS, (Ed.),Great Books of the Western World. Encyclopaedia Britannica, Chicago, 1952.
Chambers Biographical Dictionary. Chambers, Edinburgh, 1975.
Webster's Biographical Dictionary, Merriam, Springfield Mass., 1976.
op. cit., note 4, pp. 243–275.
C. COX,The Early Mental Traits of Three Hundred Geniuses, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1926, Table 12.
op. cit., note 6, chap. 3.
V. GOERTZEL, M. G. GOERTZEL,Cradles of Eminence. Little, Brown, Boston, 1962, pp. 301–349, and M. G. GOERTZEL, V. GOERTZEL, T. G. GOERTZEL,Three Hundred Eminent Personalities, Jossey-Bass San Francisco, 1978, pp. 349–393.
Science Citation Index Five-Year Cumulation 1970–1974, Institute for Scientific Information, Philadelphia, 1976. The more recent 1975–1979 accumulation was not used since it had not been published at the time this study began, in 1980.
See, e.g., S. COLE, J. R. COLE, Measuring the Quality of Sociological Research: Problems in the Use of the Science Citation Index,American Sociologist. 6 (1971), 23–29.
See N. H. NIE, C. H. HULL, J. G. JENKINS, K. STEINBRENNER, D. H. BENT,SPSS: Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (2nd ed.), McGraw-Hill, New York, 1975, chap. 24.
J. C. NUNNALLY,Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1967, chap. 7.
J. TYNDALL,Fragments of Science (Vol. 2), Appleton, New York, 1897, p. 336.
NUNNALLY, op. cit., note 39, p. 204.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Simonton, D.K. Scientific eminence historical and contemporary: A measurement assessment. Scientometrics 6, 169–182 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016760
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016760
Keywords
- Complex Time
- Time Trend
- Variable Operationalizations
- Space Measure
- Historical Record