Peer Effects and Academics’ Industry Involvement: The Moderating Role of Age on Professional Imprinting

Abstract

Die Dis cus si on Pape rs die nen einer mög lichst schnel len Ver brei tung von neue ren For schungs arbei ten des ZEW. Die Bei trä ge lie gen in allei ni ger Ver ant wor tung der Auto ren und stel len nicht not wen di ger wei se die Mei nung des ZEW dar.Dis cus si on Papers are inten ded to make results of ZEW research prompt ly avai la ble to other eco no mists in order to encou ra ge dis cus si on and sug gesti ons for revi si ons. The aut hors are sole ly respon si ble for the con tents which do not neces sa ri ly repre sent the opi ni on of the ZEW.Download this ZEW Discussion Paper from our ftp server:http://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp12011.pdf Non-technical SummaryHow does social interaction influence an academic's decision to become entrepreneurial and to collaborate with industry? Does the academic's age attenuate or amplify its effects? Since links between science and industry have become a widespread phenomenon over the last decades, a growing body of literature has investigated the role of peers in shaping an academic's engagement in commercial activities. In this paper, we seek to shed more light on the boundary conditions for the effects of social interaction on a scientist's engagement with industry. Specifically, we examine the impact of localized and personal peer effects on academics' involvement with industry and how these effects are moderated by the career age of the scientist. We suggest that both localized and personal peer effects drive industry involvement but that the effects from such imprinting are more pronounced for younger researchers, suggesting that professional imprinting takes place in the early stages of a scientist's academic career.Our empirical analysis rests upon a sample of 330 academic scientists working in the field of biotechnology in Germany who were surveyed in 2010. The results indicate that Social interaction plays a major role in shaping scientists' propensity to engage with industry.Both localized and personal peer effects turn out to be relevant which confirms and extends prior literature. Moreover, the scientist's career age turns out to be an important boundary condition, but only for one type of peer effects. While localized peer effects, i.e. the scientist department's co-publications with industry, lead to imprinting particularly in the early years of a scientist's career, the personal peer effect remains unaffected by the career age.Moreover, for younger researchers the localized peer effect is larger than the personal peer effect. Our results hold important implications for science, technology and innovation policy on how to stimulate academics' engagement with industry. January 2012 Abstract This study explores the interaction between professional imprinting and age in the context of industry-science collaboration. Specifically, we examine the impact of localized and personal peer effects on academics' involvement with industry and how these effects are moderated by the career age of the scientist. We suggest that both localized and personal peer effec...

Has globalization triggered collective impact of national intelligence on economic growth?

“…Altogether, people's global interconnectivity positively induces a -peer effect,‖ which enhances their productivity, as has been proved empirically in various fields of study, such as development studies (e.g., Foster & Rosenzweig, 1996;Godlonton & Thornton, 2012;Miguel & Kremer, 2004), education (e.g., Brunello, De Paola, & Scoppa, 2010;Carrell, Fullerton, & West, 2009;Rindermann & Heller, 2005), industrial organization (e.g., Aschhoff & Grimpe, 2012;Mas & Moretti, 2009), and labor (e.g., Kling, Liebman, & Katz, 2007;Owens 2012). Globalization is focused consistently on the swift development of science and technology and on increasing cross-country division of labor, which encourages countries to reduce trade barriers steadily and open up their current accounts and capital accounts (Shangquan, 2000).…”

Authorship analysis of specialized vs diversified research output

“…In fact in the daily practice of scientific activity, "The outcome of an interaction is to a large extent dependent on the balancing of contradicting motivations accompanying the establishment of collaborations" (Mayrose & Freilich, 2015). The intensity with which these collaborations develop (intramural/extramural, domestic/international, intradisciplinary/interdisciplinary) varies on the basis of contextual and personal factors, such as gender (Bozeman & Gaughan, 2011;Abramo, D'Angelo, & Murgia, 2013a;Ozel, Kretschmer, & Kretschmer, 2014), age (van Rijnsoever & Hessels, 2011;Aschhoff & Grimpe, 2011;Abramo, D'Angelo, & Murgia, 2017), academic rank (Lee & Bozeman, 2005;Rivellini, Rizzi, & Zaccarin, 2006;Abramo, D'Angelo, & Murgia, 2014), the research discipline involved (Yoshikane & Kageura, 2004;Gazni, Sugimoto, & Didegah, 2012). Even within a single discipline there can be notable heterogeneity in the forms of activating collaboration, due to the different specializations involved (Piette & Ross, 1992;Newman, 2001;Moody, 2004;Abramo, D'Angelo & Murgia, 2013b).…”