Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Taylor and Francis Group, Historical Methods: A Journal of Quantitative and Interdisciplinary History, 2(43), p. 91-96

DOI: 10.1080/01615440903270273

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Change in Reputation as an Index of Genius and Eminence

Journal article published in 2010 by Mark A. Runco, James C. Kaufman ORCID, Lindsay R. Halladay, Jason C. Cole
This paper is available in a repository.
This paper is available in a repository.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Many previous investigations have relied on entries in encyclopedias or similar sources (e.g., Who's Who) to quantify eminence and achievement. The premises in these earlier studies have been that eminence is a function of reputation and that reputation is accurately captured by encyclopedias and the like. In this article, the authors examine reputational changes from era to era. They expected that a comparison of encyclopedias from different eras would show significant changes, with some eminent persons having reputations (or at least biographical entries) that increase, some having reputations that decrease, and others having stable reputations. Can such change (or stability) be reliably assessed and predicted? To address these questions, encyclopedia entry length from 1911 was compared to encyclopedia entry length from 2002, using 1,004 individuals selected in a previous biographical study. Regression analysis indicates that biographical entries did in fact change significantly. The authors also explore implications for definitions of eminence and for the quantification of reputation.