Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Make science disruptive again

Nature Biotechnology volume 41, pages 450–451 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

The rate of scientific innovation appears to be slowing down: despite immense investments, the proportion of individual projects that push science in new directions by breaking with previous understanding has decreased since the 1950s1. Some observers have attributed these diminishing returns to the notion that fewer fundamental discoveries remain to be made2. But a compelling case can be made for another factor: that the culture of science has gradually transitioned toward a more executive and results-oriented approach. In this fast-paced mode, scientists and scientists-in-training — graduate students and postdoctoral fellows — have little time for more exploratory topics, which contributes to a less creative environment for transformative science. This trend may have been fortified by science becoming increasingly entrenched into siloed disciplines3 and by projects being progressively dominated by hypothesis-driven approaches4, fueled by a spirit of strategic design that emphasizes predictability rather than unexpected results.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it

$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Park, M., Leahey, E. & Funk, R. J. Nature 613, 138–144 (2023).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bloom, N., Jones, C. I., Van Reenen, J. & Webb, M. Am. Econ. Rev. 110, 1104–1144 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Yanai, I. & Lercher, M. Genome Biol. 21, 67 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Yanai, I. & Lercher, M. Genome Biol. 21, 231 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Yanai, I. & Lercher, M. A course on the creative scientific process. Night Science https://night-science.org/a-course-on-the-creative-scientific-process/ (accessed 14 March 2023).

  6. Night Science. BMC https://www.biomedcentral.com/collections/night-science (accessed 14 March 2021).

  7. Yanai, I. & Lercher, M. Night Science https://nightscience.buzzsprout.com/ (2023).

  8. Yanai, I. & Lercher, M. Genome Biol. 20, 179 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Jacob, F. The Statue Within: An Autobiography (CSHL Press, 1995).

  10. Strevens, M. The Knowledge Machine: How Irrationality Created Modern Science (Liveright, 2020).

  11. Hunter, S. T., Bedell, K. E. & Mumford, M. D. Creativity Res. J. 19, 69–90 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. DeHaan, R. L. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 8, 172–181 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Dennett, D. C. The Intentional Stance (MIT Press, 1987).

  14. Yanai, I. & Lercher, M. Genome Biol. 21, 147 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Alon, U. Why science demands a leap into the unknown. ted.com https://www.ted.com/talks/uri_alon_why_science_demands_a_leap_into_the_unknown (2014).

  16. Yanai, I. & Lercher, M. Genome Biol. 23, 4 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Gore, J., Youk, H. & van Oudenaarden, A. Nature 459, 253–256 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Benioff, P. J. Stat. Phys. 22, 563–591 (1980).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Yanai, I. & Lercher, M. Genome Biol. 23, 179 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Yanai, I. & Lercher, M. Genome Biol. 20, 289 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Bolotnyy, V., Basilico, M. & Barreira, P. J. Econ. Lit. 60, 1188–1222 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ness, R. B. Acad. Med. 86, 1201–1203 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Systems Genetics, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA

    Itai Yanai

  2. Institute for Computer Science & Department of Biology, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany

    Martin J. Lercher

Authors
  1. Itai Yanai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Martin J. Lercher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Itai Yanai.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yanai, I., Lercher, M.J. Make science disruptive again. Nat Biotechnol 41, 450–451 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-023-01736-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-023-01736-5

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing