Intrinsic and Extrinsic Science: A Dialectic of Scientific Fame
Perspectives in Psychological Science
In this article, I argue that scientific fame and impact exists on a continuum from the mundane to the transformative/revolutionary. Ideally, one achieves fame and impact in science by synthesizing two extreme career prototypes: intrinsic and extrinsic research. The former is guided by interest, curiosity, passion, gut, and intuition for important untapped topics. The latter is guided by money, grants, and/or what is being published in top-tier journals. Assessment of fame and impact in science ultimately rests on productivity (publication) and some variation of its impact (citations). In addition to those traditional measures of impact, there are some relatively new metrics (e.g., the h index and altmetrics). If psychology is to achieve consensual cumulative progress and better rates of replication, I propose that upcoming psychologists would do well to understand that success is not equal to fame and that individual career success is not necessarily the same as disciplinary success. Finally, if one is to have a successful and perhaps even famous career in psychological science, a good strategy would be to synthesize intrinsic and extrinsic motives for one’s research.
fame, creativity, impact, citation indexing, publication count, replicability
Gregory J. Feist. "Intrinsic and Extrinsic Science: A Dialectic of Scientific Fame" Perspectives in Psychological Science (2016): 893-898. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616660535