Science's greatest discoverers: a shift towards greater interdisciplinarity, top universities and older age

The question of what distinguishes the individuals responsible for science's most significant breakthroughs has intrigued scientists and the public alike. Previous research often focused on specific samples of discoverers, limiting the scope of generalization. This study addresses this limitation by examining a comprehensive dataset encompassing all Nobel Prize and major non-Nobel Prize scientific discoveries. It aims to identify overarching patterns in the demographic, institutional, and economic characteristics of these eminent scientists across scientific fields and historical periods. The study’s importance lies in its potential to inform strategies for fostering a more inclusive and innovative scientific environment by identifying features and patterns that promote discoveries and highlighting systematic biases that hinder them. The study also aims to understand the evolving nature of the scientific system, considering factors such as geographic location, gender, religious affiliation, and the role of top universities. The analysis sheds light on how these factors vary across time and disciplines, ultimately offering insights into how to better support future prominent scientists and ensure a more diverse scientific community.

Existing studies on scientific discoveries and the traits of discoverers have utilized various approaches, often focusing on specific samples of scientists within a given time frame, field, or country. Examples include Zuckerman's influential work on Nobel laureates in the US, which explored demographic and social characteristics such as social status, age, gender, religion, and ethnicity. Other studies have individually examined factors like age, education level, interdisciplinary background, gender, country of residence, and religious affiliation in relation to scientific success. However, the lack of representative data encompassing all major discoverers across countries and time has hindered the ability to make generalizable claims about the characteristics of science's major discoverers. This study fills that gap by compiling a comprehensive dataset.

This study compiled data on all 533 Nobel Prize-winning discoveries in science (1901-2022) and 228 major non-Nobel Prize discoveries identified from seven widely-regarded science textbooks. The selection of textbooks ensured representation across scientific fields and historical periods. Data on discoverers’ age, education level, gender, country of birth and residence, university affiliation, and religious affiliation were gathered from sources such as Encyclopaedia Britannica, official Nobel Prize documentation, and other encyclopaedias of science. Data on university rankings were sourced from QS World University Rankings, population size and income per capita from the Maddison Project Database, and religious affiliation from Sherby (2002) and other publications, including direct contact with living Nobel laureates. The data collection process spanned fifteen months, resulting in over 20,000 data points across over two dozen variables for each of the 761 discoveries. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the evolution of these characteristics over time and across different scientific fields. The data reflects the year of publication for the discovery unless explicitly noted otherwise; this allows analysis of factors influencing discoveries at the time of their occurrence, rather than solely focusing on characteristics at the time of Nobel Prize award.

The study reveals several key findings: 1. **Interdisciplinarity:** Approximately half of all Nobel Prize discoveries (54%) and a substantial proportion of major non-Nobel Prize discoveries (42%) were made by scientists with two or more degrees in different academic fields. This is particularly pronounced in medicine and biology, with lower proportions in more specialized fields like physics. This highlights the importance of interdisciplinary training and the ability to connect methods and knowledge from different domains for making significant breakthroughs. 2. **University Affiliation:** Thirty percent of both Nobel and non-Nobel Prize discoveries were made at researchers affiliated with universities ranked within the top 25 globally. This highlights the concentration of resources, advanced equipment, and collaborations at elite institutions. While many standard scientific methods are inexpensive, top universities offer advantages in accessing sophisticated facilities and networks. Expanding to the top 50 universities increased the percentage to around 35%. 3. **Age of Discoverers:** The most productive age range for major discoveries is between 35 and 45 years old, with 50% of Nobel laureates falling within this range. The proportion of discoveries made by those over 50 is significantly lower (7% for Nobel Prizes, 15% for non-Nobel Prizes), and the number drops even further for those over 60. This trend is partly explained by the increasing complexity of scientific knowledge and methods requiring more extensive training and research before reaching the research frontier. 4. **Gender Disparity:** Women remain significantly underrepresented among major scientific discoverers, accounting for only 5% of all discoveries and 3% of Nobel laureates. This disparity persists across different scientific fields, highlighting persistent systemic biases in access to education and research opportunities for women. 5. **Collaboration:** Although scientific discovery is inherently collaborative, the Nobel Prize structure often awards credit to only a few individuals, thus neglecting the substantial contributions of larger research teams. The study highlights this discrepancy between the reality of scientific collaboration and the recognition it receives. 6. **Geographic Distribution:** The geographic distribution of discoverers has shifted over time. While Europe dominated discoveries up to 1900, the share has decreased significantly, with North America becoming more prominent. This shift reflects academic migration and the concentration of resources and opportunities in certain regions. 7. **Religious Affiliation:** A negative correlation exists between religious affiliation and the rise of science, with a notable decline in the proportion of religious discoverers over time, particularly in astronomy. 8. **Economic Factors:** While access to sophisticated instruments is not evenly distributed across countries, the study found that discoverers in poorer countries do not necessarily face significant constraints in using common scientific methods and instruments if a basic level of resources are available.

The findings address the research question by providing a comprehensive profile of the characteristics associated with making major scientific discoveries. The significance of these results lies in their implications for science policy, research funding, and institutional structures. The study highlights the increasing importance of interdisciplinarity, revealing a need for educational and funding policies that support interdisciplinary training and collaboration. The concentration of discoveries at elite universities suggests potential inequalities in access to resources and opportunities, highlighting the need for strategies to promote equitable access. The age-related findings raise questions about career structures and support systems for scientists, particularly in later career stages. Addressing the severe underrepresentation of women underscores the need for ongoing efforts to promote gender equality in science. The discrepancy between collaborative research practices and the structure of scientific awards suggests the need for reforms that better reflect the collaborative nature of scientific advancement. Finally, the geographic shifts observed highlight the importance of international collaboration and resource allocation to promote a truly global scientific endeavor.

This study provides a comprehensive analysis of the characteristics of scientists who have made significant contributions to science. The key finding is the increasing importance of interdisciplinarity, a trend that should guide future science policy and resource allocation. The study also highlights the need to address systemic biases and inequalities to foster a more inclusive and innovative scientific community. Future research could explore the potential role of psychological traits and further investigate the dynamics of collaboration within research teams.

The study relies on data from a limited number of science textbooks to identify major non-Nobel Prize discoveries, which could introduce some bias in the selection of discoveries. The definition of ‘major’ non-Nobel discoveries is subjective, and other definitions might yield different results. Data on certain variables, such as psychological traits of discoverers, were unavailable due to the limited availability of historical data. This lack of data limits the extent to which psychological factors influencing scientific success can be explored. Additionally, the analysis relies on existing university rankings, which can change over time and may not perfectly reflect the relative resources and research capabilities of institutions across all historical periods.