TY - JOUR
T1 - How contemporary academic structures constrain scientific creativity and hold back early-career researchers
AU - Haubrock, Phillip J.
AU - Kouba, Antonin
AU - Soto, Ismael
AU - Abreo, Neil Angelo S.
AU - Vilizzi, Lorenzo
AU - Blonska, Dagmara
AU - Tarkan, Ali Serhan
AU - De Santis, Vanessa
AU - Sousa, Ronaldo
AU - Nogueira, Antonio Barbosa
AU - Heeren, Senne
AU - Nogueira, Joana Garrido
AU - Cano-Barbacil, Carlos
AU - Cremella, Bruno
AU - Strubbe, Diederik
AU - da Silva, Janine Pereira
AU - Poloni, Riccardo
AU - Deschepper, Pablo
AU - Thore, Eli S. J.
AU - Misteli, Benjamin
AU - Sun, Jingrui
AU - Panisi, Martina
AU - Dudgeon, David
AU - Stamatiadou, Valentini
AU - Galib, Shams M.
AU - Maes, Chelly
AU - Baso, Nompumelelo C.
AU - Beukema, Wouter
AU - Stevove, Barbora
AU - Zahorska, Eva
AU - Kurtul, Irmak
AU - Kaur, Davinder
AU - Huber, Augusto Frederico
AU - Halabowski, Dariusz
AU - de Assis Guilherme Padilha, Janeide
AU - Balzani, Paride
AU - Kaya, Cuneyt
AU - Baycelebi, Esra
AU - Mugnai, Michele
AU - Ahmed, Danish A.
AU - Sac, Gulsah
AU - Aksu, Sadi
AU - Kaya, Burak Malik
AU - Ciftcioglu, Mulkibar
AU - Jiang, Xiaoming
AU - Rodriguez-Rey, Marta
AU - Martin-Fores, Irene
AU - Leles, Suzana Goncalves
AU - Parvulescu, Lucian
AU - Pergl, Jan
AU - Rossetto, Federica
AU - Wei, Hui
AU - Kirichenko, Natalia I.
AU - Briski, Elizabeta
AU - Gallitelli, Luca
AU - Britton, J. Robert
AU - Everts, Teun
N1 - FTX: Abonnement
© 2026. Springer Nature Limited.
PY - 2026/9/3
Y1 - 2026/9/3
N2 - We argue that contemporary scientific systems progressively constrain high-risk and conceptually innovative research while being increasingly structured around short funding cycles, productivity-based evaluation criteria and risk-averse frameworks that favour predictable and non-transformative research outputs. Drawing on recent empirical literature, we show how such systems can place disproportionate pressure on early-career researchers by incentivizing safe, tractable and easily evaluated outputs. Structural academic mechanisms such as peer review and funding, escalating publication costs and institutional inequalities interact with precarious employment and hierarchical dependencies. In this environment, we contend that strategic conformity becomes a rational career path. This risks suppressing creativity and critical thinking precisely at the stage when scientific independence could otherwise emerge. Consequently, the probability of substantive contributions by early-career researchers is declining, while talent may increasingly abandon academia or cluster within a limited number of well-resourced institutions and national systems. By adopting a systems-level perspective, we argue that scientific creativity is not merely an individual trait but an emerging property of a supportive academic landscape and that maintaining or restoring it may require substantial structural reforms. These include promoting stable research pathways, decentralized decision-making and evaluation frameworks that better recognize collaboration, originality, persistence and nonlinear career trajectories. Without systemic change, we risk stifling the potential of early-career researchers to go beyond the confines of existing methods and approaches and deliver transformative advances. This would limit their capacity to meaningfully change our understanding of the world or benefit society, with impacts that fall short of their potential.
AB - We argue that contemporary scientific systems progressively constrain high-risk and conceptually innovative research while being increasingly structured around short funding cycles, productivity-based evaluation criteria and risk-averse frameworks that favour predictable and non-transformative research outputs. Drawing on recent empirical literature, we show how such systems can place disproportionate pressure on early-career researchers by incentivizing safe, tractable and easily evaluated outputs. Structural academic mechanisms such as peer review and funding, escalating publication costs and institutional inequalities interact with precarious employment and hierarchical dependencies. In this environment, we contend that strategic conformity becomes a rational career path. This risks suppressing creativity and critical thinking precisely at the stage when scientific independence could otherwise emerge. Consequently, the probability of substantive contributions by early-career researchers is declining, while talent may increasingly abandon academia or cluster within a limited number of well-resourced institutions and national systems. By adopting a systems-level perspective, we argue that scientific creativity is not merely an individual trait but an emerging property of a supportive academic landscape and that maintaining or restoring it may require substantial structural reforms. These include promoting stable research pathways, decentralized decision-making and evaluation frameworks that better recognize collaboration, originality, persistence and nonlinear career trajectories. Without systemic change, we risk stifling the potential of early-career researchers to go beyond the confines of existing methods and approaches and deliver transformative advances. This would limit their capacity to meaningfully change our understanding of the world or benefit society, with impacts that fall short of their potential.
KW - Brain-drain
KW - Impact
KW - Knowledge
KW - Performance
KW - Reviewers
KW - Science
KW - Crisis
UR - https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=itm_wosliteitg&SrcAuth=WosAPI&KeyUT=WOS:001866705300001&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=WOS_CPL
U2 - 10.1038/s41562-026-02575-5
DO - 10.1038/s41562-026-02575-5
M3 - Review
C2 - 42693268
SN - 2397-3374
JO - Nature Human Behaviour
JF - Nature Human Behaviour
ER -