1988/02/01 by Peter Messeri · 1 citation
Arts and Humanities · Decision Sciences · Psychology · #Economics #Epistemology #History #Law #Philosophy #Philosophy and History of Science #Political science #Positive economics #Psychology #Social science #Sociology #Sociology of scientific knowledge #Structuring #scientometrics and bibliometrics research
paper · doi:10.1177/030631288018001004
openalex publication_date 1988/02/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28
Some studies seem to indicate that age may not be nearly so powerful a factor in structuring scientific disputes as has long been supposed. This paper views the weak and apparently inconsistent empirical associations reported in earlier studies as arising from incomplete analysis of the relationship between age and receptivity to new scientific theories. Explanations as to why age and receptivity might co-vary have focused on motivational factors that reinforce attachments to existing knowledge, overlooking the possibility that the resources which scientists accrue during their careers may well buffer the increased intellectual risk taken in advocating speculative theories. Older scientists may therefore be better positioned than their younger colleagues to speak out earlier in support of new but controversial theories. Age may thus have contradictory effects on receptivity. The hypothesis that the effects of age are mediated by historical changes in prevailing scientific opinion is examined by a quantitative case study of the reception of continental and later plate tectonics theory.