Jeffrey Alexander

Director, Innovation Policy @RTI_Intl. Unrepentant wonk at the intersection of tech, policy, #innovation & strategy. #scipol #scientometrics #eval #bigdata

[Jeffrey Alexander @techiewonk]

@hayliebswenson “I have 12 percent of a plan!”

[Jeffrey Alexander @techiewonk]

@JMateosGarcia I have to say, it was fantastic in the movie theatre!

[Jeffrey Alexander @techiewonk]

@KumarAGarg I still remember as a young science policy graduate student watching the vote to defund the OTA on C-SPAN. Boy, that was depressing (especially since I wanted to work there after graduating).

[Jeffrey Alexander @techiewonk]

@csugimoto @IsmaelRafols @sppgatech We were fortunate to have him visit the DC office of @RTI_Intl last week to discuss research evaluation!

[Jeffrey Alexander @techiewonk]

@mattsclancy I'll try to dig up a few citations but to illustrate, innovation is defined as something put into use. Only a fraction of patents are "worked" (deployed in practice) so relying on patent counts overstates the incidence of innovation.

[Jeffrey Alexander @techiewonk]

@mattsclancy This reflects a fundamental issue in innovations studies--that patents measure invention, but invention is not the same as innovation and treating the two as equivalent leads to perverse conclusions.

[Jeffrey Alexander @techiewonk]

@mattsclancy For example, I would expect studies using papers to disagree with studies using patents, as the motives and incentives to publish are very different from those for patenting. In fact, agreement between such studies makes me trust both studies less.

[Jeffrey Alexander @techiewonk]

@stuartbuck1 Is this part of your solution? https://t.co/dnBbOC6uxw

[Jeffrey Alexander @techiewonk]

@MishaTeplitskiy The whole concept of a "disruptive" discovery is that it would receive low scores in traditional measures of "scientific impact" even though it has very high potential future impact. So the lack of correlation is consistent with that framing.

[Jeffrey Alexander @techiewonk]

@KumarAGarg @stuartbuck1 @eric_is_weird @jordanschneider @tkalil2050 @calebwatney @Parthion Or, to be more accurate, ask the people advising the key policymakers, since they are usually the ones who screened the options and evidence to present to the policymakers.

[Jeffrey Alexander @techiewonk]

@UW_LSC @scheufele @AAASmeetings FYI I can’t find this session on the schedule in the meeting app.

[Jeffrey Alexander @techiewonk]

As might be expected, far more questions generated than solutions or answered

[Jeffrey Alexander @techiewonk]

Sitting in an incredibly wide-ranging open discussion on how #AI might be used in science policy at #aaasmtg #scipol

[Jeffrey Alexander @techiewonk]

@leahstokes I would appreciate receiving a code, if any are left…TIA

[Jeffrey Alexander @techiewonk]

@ashleyruba_phd Good charts but academics like Donna Ginther and Paula Stephan, noted labor economists, have been publishing about this for years. Of course, the fact that neither you nor most of your followers have heard of them just reinforces your point.

[Jeffrey Alexander @techiewonk]

@ashleyruba_phd Lots of great data like this and more are available from @NCSESgov — plus analysis! Thanks for showing why their work matters!

[Jeffrey Alexander @techiewonk]

@FedericoMiozzo @ashleyruba_phd Keep in mind that the survey question was revised in 2017, so the stats from that year to the present may not be directly comparable to earlier data. But glad to see my colleagues’ work getting such notice!

[Jeffrey Alexander @techiewonk]

@michael_nielsen @stuartbuck1 I’d have to mine for my notes to see which directorates were more inclined towards these awards that didn’t require peer review. And I’m not sure if proposers are very aware of EAGER and RAPID as funding options.

[Jeffrey Alexander @techiewonk]

@michael_nielsen Thanks to you and @stuartbuck1 for the cite to the work by me and my colleague Caroline Wagner. As I recall we found SGER uptake varied widely by directorate, so disciplinary culture as well as bureaucratic culture may play a role.