Year: 2005
Type: dissertation
Abstract: This investigation identifies and formalizes patterns of discovery among Nobel \nLaureates in physiology or medicine. The main hypothesis is that discovery patterns are \ncharacterized by the gradual acquisition of critical, unorganized masses of findings that, \nwhen abstracted and ordered, produce a discovery outcome. Discoveries tend to consist \nof approximately seven plus or minus two basic components, which reflect the cognitive \nlimits of short-term or working memory. The second hypothesis is that critical research \nincidents, such as unanticipated problems or flashes of insight, affect individual research \nprogress. The third hypothesis is that Laureate physicians employ clinical problemsolving \nheuristics to guide their research. Content analysis of 20 Nobel Laureate \nautobiographical research accounts and statistical analysis of 62 accounts, all published \nby the Nobel Foundation between 1901 and 1990, were performed. \nA systems model emerged early in the analysis as a dominant feature of \ndiscovery, and clearly suggested the use of General Systems Theory ontology (Miller, J. \nG., Living Systems) to formalize the nature of the discoveries and demonstrate the \nimportant role of human short-term memory limitations in knowledge synthesis. A subsample \nanalysis of five early and five recent Laureate discoveries describes subsystems \nthat closely match Miller’s systems template. Further analysis of 62 Laureate discovery \naccounts reveals an average of seven sections per account (Mean=7.1; SD=2.84; \nCI=95%), while a t-test reveals no significant difference between an actual mean of 7.1 \nand a hypothetical mean of 7.0 (t=0.2685; df=61 and Mean=7.1; DF=2.84; CI=95%). The \nGeneral Systems discovery ontology, with its eight to ten unique subsystems, also reflects \nshort-term memory limitations of seven plus two chunks and helps to explain past \ndiscovery patterns. \nThe analysis supports the first hypothesis but only partially supports the second \nand third hypotheses. Laureates relied on systems models to conduct their research and \nrepresent their discoveries. Critical incidents and clinical problem-solving heuristics \nplayed a relatively minor role in progress toward discovery. The General Systems \nontology could be developed into a “discovery template” to support future discovery \nefforts.
Author: Karen Suzanne Balcom
Language: English
Subfield: History and Philosophy of Science
Field: Arts and Humanities
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W1940634771