Abstract
Science is the core sector of present-day knowledge production. Yet, the mechanisms of science as an industry are poorly understood. The economic theory of science is still in its infancy, and philosophy of science has only sparsely addressed the issue of economic rationality. Research, however, is costly. Inefficient use of resources consumed by the scientific industry is as detrimental to the collective advancement of knowledge as are deficiencies in method. Economic inefficiency encompasses methodological inadequacy. Methods are inadequate if they tend to misallocate time and effort. If one omits the question of how inputs are transformed into outputs in self-organised knowledge production, this means neglecting an essential aspect of the collective rationality of science. A self-organised tendency towards efficiency comes to the fore as soon as science is described as an economy in which researchers invest their own attention in order to obtain the attention of others. Viewed like this, scientific communication appears to be a market where information is exchanged for attention. Scientific information is measured in terms of the attention it earns. Since scientists demand scientific information as a means of production, the attention that a theory attracts is a measure of its value as a capital good. On the other hand, the attention a scientist earns is capitalised into the asset called reputation. Elaborating the ideas introduced in Franck (1998) and (1999), the paper describes science as a highly developed market economy. Science conceived as capital market covers the specific conditions under which scientists, while maximising their reputation, optimise output in the eyes of those competent to judge. Attention is not just any resource. It is the resource whose efficient use is called intelligence. Science, as an industry transforming attention into cognitive output, is bound to miss the hallmark of rationality if it does not pass a test of collective intelligence. The paper closes with considering the prospective outcome of such a test.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ben–david, J. (1971), The Scientist's Role in Society. A Comparative Study, Chicago: Chicago University Press (2nd edition: 1984).
Bonitz, M. (1990), Science Citation Index on CD–ROM: The largest expert system in the world, International Forum on Information and Documentation, 15(3): 9–12.
Bonitz, M., E. Bruckner, A. Scharnhorst (1997), Characteristics and impact of the Matthew Effect for Countries, Scientometrics, 40(3): 407–422.
Dasgupta, P., P. A. David (1994), Towards a new economics of science, Research Policy, 23(5): 487–521.
Franck, G. (1993), The economy of attention, Telepolis, http://www.heise.de/tp/english/special/auf/5567/1.html (translation of an essay appeared in German in Merkur, 534/535: 748–761).
Franck, G. (1998), Ökonomie der Aufmerksamkeit (The Economy of Attention), Munich: Carl Hanser.
Franck, G. (1999), Scientific communication: a vanity fair? Science, 286: 53–55.
Garfield, E. (1977), Essays of an Information Scientist, Vols 1–15, Philadelphia: ISI–Press, 1977–1993.
Gross, A., J. Harmon (1999), What's right about scientific writing?, The Scientist, 13 (December 9): 20–233.
Hagstrom, W. O. (1966), The Scientific Community, New York: Basic Books.
Kitcher, P. (1993), The Advancement of Science. Science without Legend, Objectivity without Illusions; New York: Oxford UP.
Mach, E. (1883), The Science of Mechanics: A Critical and Historical Account of its Development, tr. by Thomas J. McCormack, Chicago: Open Court ( 2nd edition: 1902).
Merton, R. K. (1957), Priorities in scientific discovery, American Sociological Review, 22: 635–659.
Merton, R. K. (1968), The Matthew Effect in science, Science, 159: 56–62.
Merton, R. K. (1973), The Sociology of Science, Chicago: Chicago UP.
Popper, K. R. (1959), The Logic of Scientific Discovery, London: Hutchinson.
Ravetz, J. R. (1971), Scientific Knowledge and Its Social Problems, Oxford: Clarendon Press (new edition: London: Transaction Publishers, 1996).
Rescher, N. (1989), Cognitive Economy. The Economic Dimension of the Theory of Knowledge, Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh UP.
Stephan, P. E. (1996), The economics of science, Journal of Economic Literature, 34: 1199–1235.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Franck, G. The scientific economy of attention: A novel approach to the collective rationality of science. Scientometrics 55, 3–26 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016059402618
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016059402618