{"id":87859,"date":"2019-02-18T05:04:27","date_gmt":"2019-02-18T13:04:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/2019\/02\/small-research-teams-disrupt-science-more-radically-than-large-ones"},"modified":"2019-02-18T05:04:27","modified_gmt":"2019-02-18T13:04:27","slug":"small-research-teams-disrupt-science-more-radically-than-large-ones","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/2019\/02\/small-research-teams-disrupt-science-more-radically-than-large-ones","title":{"rendered":"Small research teams \u2018disrupt\u2019 science more radically than large ones"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a class=\"aligncenter blog-photo\" href=\"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog.images\/small-research-teams-disrupt-science-more-radically-than-large-ones2.jpg\"><\/a><\/p>\n<p>The current infatuation with large-scale scientific collaborations and the energy they can bring to a scientific domain owes much to the robust correlation that exists between citation impact and team size. This relationship has been well documented in the emerging \u2018science of science\u2019 field. Writing in <i>Nature<\/i>, Wu et al. use a new citation-based index to nuance this conventional wisdom. They find that small and large teams differ in a measurable and systematic way in the extent of the \u2018disruption\u2019 they cause to the scientific area to which they contribute.<\/p>\n<hr>\n<p>The application of a new citation metric prompts a reassessment of the relationship between the size of scientific teams and research impact, and calls into question the trend to emphasize \u2018big team\u2019 science. The disruptive contributions of small teams to science.<\/p>\n<p><!-- Link: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.nature.com\/articles\/d41586-019-00350-3\">https:\/\/www.nature.com\/articles\/d41586&#45;019&#45;00350&#45;3<\/a> --><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The current infatuation with large-scale scientific collaborations and the energy they can bring to a scientific domain owes much to the robust correlation that exists between citation impact and team size. This relationship has been well documented in the emerging \u2018science of science\u2019 field. Writing in Nature, Wu et al. use a new citation-based index [\u2026]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":507,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[224],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-87859","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-science"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/87859","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/507"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=87859"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/87859\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=87859"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=87859"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=87859"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}