Is novel research worth doing? Evidence from peer review at 49 journals

Misha Teplitskiy, Hao Peng, Andrea Blasco and Karim R. Lakhani
Additional contact information
Misha Teplitskiy: a School of Information, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109;; b Laboratory for Innovation Science at Harvard, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138;
Hao Peng: a School of Information, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109;
Andrea Blasco: b Laboratory for Innovation Science at Harvard, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138;; c Harvard Business School, Boston, MA 02163;
Karim R. Lakhani: b Laboratory for Innovation Science at Harvard, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138;; c Harvard Business School, Boston, MA 02163;; d Digital, Data and Design Institute, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2022, vol. 119, issue 47, e2118046119

Abstract: There are long-standing concerns that scientific institutions, which often rely on peer review to select the best projects, tend to select conservative ones and thereby discourage novel research. Using peer review data from 49 journals in the life and physical sciences, we examined whether less novel manuscripts were likelier to be accepted for publication. Measuring the novelty of manuscripts as atypical combinations of journals in their reference lists, we found no evidence of conservatism. Across journals, more novel manuscripts were more likely to be accepted, even when peer reviewers were similarly enthusiastic. The findings suggest that peer review is not inherently conservative, and help explain why researchers continue to do novel work.

Keywords: novelty; peer review; bias; publishing (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.pnas.org/content/119/47/e2118046119.full (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:nas:journl:v:119:y:2022:p:e2118046119

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Bibliographic data for series maintained by PNAS Product Team ().