Against the Burden of Knowledge

🌈 Abstract

The article discusses the "burden of knowledge" hypothesis, which claims that new ideas are getting harder to find because researchers have to spend more time learning existing knowledge before they can expand the frontier. The article examines the evidence for and against this hypothesis, and suggests that while the burden of knowledge can explain some empirical trends, it is unlikely to be the sole or primary driver of the divergence between R&D inputs and productivity growth outputs observed in recent decades.

🙋 Q&A

[01] The Burden of Knowledge Hypothesis

1. What is the burden of knowledge hypothesis?

• The burden of knowledge hypothesis claims that new ideas inherently get harder to find because researchers have to spend more time learning more old ideas before they are ready to expand the frontier of knowledge.
• The argument is that as knowledge accumulates, the necessary pre-requisite education for making new contributions increases, making it harder to expand the frontier.

2. What evidence is presented in favor of the burden of knowledge hypothesis?

• The average age of authors in academic journals is increasing, as is the age when Nobel laureates do their best work.
• More journal articles and patents are being written in larger teams, as researchers specialize in narrower topics to get to the frontier faster and then collaborate.
• It is becoming less common and less rewarding for researchers or inventors to contribute to multiple fields of study, again suggesting specialization in response to a greater burden of knowledge.

3. What are some problems with the burden of knowledge hypothesis?

• The history of scientific and technological progress shows many examples where new discoveries completely supplanted old knowledge, rather than requiring the accumulation of that knowledge.
• Specialization in response to a greater burden of knowledge often takes the form of researchers using complex tools they do not fully understand, rather than collaborating in large teams. This can actually accelerate progress.
• The trends of aging researchers, larger teams, and narrower specialization could also be explained by institutional decay in academia, rather than an inherent burden of knowledge.

[02] Alternatives to the Burden of Knowledge Hypothesis

1. How does the article suggest the modern world has responded to accumulated knowledge?

• The article argues that specialization and trade for complex tools has allowed researchers to expand the frontier of knowledge without needing to fully understand all the underlying burden of knowledge.
• A modern entrepreneur or scientist can leverage the accumulated knowledge embodied in tools and technologies without having to learn it all themselves.

2. What alternative explanation does the article propose for the empirical trends supporting the burden of knowledge hypothesis?

• The article suggests that the trends of aging researchers, larger teams, and narrower specialization could be explained by institutional decay in academia, rather than an inherent burden of knowledge.
• The article argues that the "inward looking networks of grant applicants and reviewers" and "risk averse funders and reviewers that reward incremental, labor intensive research" could be the root cause of these observed trends.

3. How does the article view the potential solutions to the issues raised?

• If the burden of knowledge is the primary driver, the article suggests the solution is inevitable and the trends are unavoidable.
• However, if the issue is institutional decay, the article proposes "metascience" - the redesign of academic institutions - as a potential solution to reverse some of these trends.