The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A cognitive model of innovation
Open accessAbstract
This paper develops a theoretical framework based on empirical case study research that explains the role of tacit knowledge in technical change and how scientific knowledge is used in innovation. It develops a theoretical argument that proposes that science cannot be directly applied to produce technology because science answers the wrong question. Innovation starts with a desired end result and attempts to find the unknown starting conditions that will achieve it. Scientific knowledge, by contrast, goes in the opposite direction, from known starting conditions to unknown end results. This difference in direction is overcome by following tacitly understood traditions of technological knowledge that co-evolve with technological paradigms, but are themselves outside the realm of science. The paper demonstrates how technologies are constructed socially' and embody sociological and political conceptions of problems and appropriate solutions, but the theory maintains a very realist perspective. The Cognitive approach treats knowledge as a capacity that is embodied in the brain, and embedded in socialised practices, using the metaphor of pattern'. The paper explores why scientific patterns cannot be perfectly extrapolated for complex, non-trivial technologies and shows why technical change is dependent on learnt tacit conceptions of similarity that cannot be reduced to information processing.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development
Leonard-Barton, D. (1992) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250131009 · Cited by 6,477
Intentionality: An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind
Searle, J. R. (1983) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139173452 · Cited by 4,575
Searle, J. R. (1992) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/5834.001.0001 · Cited by 3,595
The Emperor's New Mind: Concerning Computers, Minds, and The Laws of Physics
Penrose, R., & Gardner, M. (1989) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198519737.001.0001 · Cited by 2,007
Cited by
Thinking about technology: Applying a cognitive lens to technical change
Kaplan, S., & Tripsas, M. (2008) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2008.02.002 · Cited by 661
Martinelli, A., Meyer, M., & von Tunzelmann, N. (2008) · The Journal of Technology Transfer · doi:10.1007/s10961-007-9031-5 · Cited by 265
Managing knowledge transfer by knowledge technologies
Garavelli, A. C., Gorgoglione, M., & Scozzi, B. (2002) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/s0166-4972(01)00009-8 · Cited by 167
Metadata
- Authors
- Nightingale, P.
- Venue
- Research Policy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1998-11
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 689-709
- ISSN
- 0048-7333 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2053247503
- Cited by
- 324
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 19.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A cognitive model of innovation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0048-7333(98)00078-x
- The paper
- Nightingale, P. (1998). A cognitive model of innovation. Research Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0048-7333(98)00078-x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.