National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: 6 Perspectives on the Science of Science Policy
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2014. Science of Science and Innovation Policy: Principal Investigators' Conference Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18741.
×

References

Agarwal, R., and A. Ohyama. (2013). Industry or academia, basic or applied? Career choices and earnings trajectories of scientists. Management Science, 59(4):950-970.

Agarwal, R., W. Ding, and A. Ohyama. (no date). Gender Difference in Job Mobility and Earnings of U.S. Scientists and Engineers. University of Maryland working paper.

Blume-Kohout, M. (2012). Effects of Changes in Federal Funding on Academic R&D in the Biomedical Sciences. Presentation at the SciSIP PI Conference, Washington, DC, September 20-21.

Bozeman, B. and D. Sarewitz. (2005). Public value failures and science policy. Science and Public Policy, 32(2):119-136.

Bozeman, B., and D. Sarewitz. (2011). Public value mapping and science policy evaluation. Minerva, 49(1):1-23.

Bradshaw, G. (2012). Science, the Little Bang, and Edison. Presentation at the SciSIP PI Conference, Washington, DC, September 20-21.

Branstetter, L., C. Chatterjee, and M. Higgins. (2013a). Regulation and Welfare: Evidence from Paragraph-IV Generic Entry in the Pharmaceutical Industry. Working paper, Scheller College of Business, Georgia Institute of Technology (NBER Working Paper: 17188).

Branstetter, L., C. Chatterjee, and M. Higgins. (2013b). Starving (or Fattening) the Golden Goose: Generic Entry and Incentives for Early-Stage Pharmaceutical Innovation. Georgia Institution of Technology working paper.

Brown, C., J. Lane, and T. Sturgeon. (2013). Workers’ views of the impact of trade on jobs. Industrial Relations, 52(1):1-21, January.

Brown, C., T. Sturgeon, and C. Cole. (2013). The 2010 National Organizations Survey: Examining the relationships between job quality and the domestic and international sourcing of business functions by United States organizations. IRLE Working Paper, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA. Available at: http://www.irle.berkeley.edu/workingpapers/ [November 2013].

Brunt, L., J. Lerner, and T. Nicholas. (2012). Inducement prizes and innovation. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 60(4):657-696.

Bus, J., and M-H. Nguyen. (2013). Personal data management: A structured discussion. In Digital Enlightenment Yearbook 2013: The Value of Personal Data. Amsterdam: IOS Press.

Chan, J., K. Fu, C. Schunn, J. Cagan, K. Wood, and K. Kotovsky. (2011). On the benefits and pitfalls of analogies for innovative design: Ideation performance based on analogical distance, commonness, and modality of examples. Journal of Mechanical Design, 133:081004-1-11.

Chan, J., S. Paletz, and C. Schunn. (2012). Analogy as a strategy for supporting complex problem solving under uncertainty. Memory & Cognition, 40:1352-1365.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2014. Science of Science and Innovation Policy: Principal Investigators' Conference Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18741.
×

Christensen, B., and C. Schunn. (2007). The relationship of analogical distance to analogical function and preinventive structure: The case of engineering design. Memory & Cognition, 35:29-38.

Christopher, S., J. McCormick, and J. Owen-Smith. (2010). Federal policy and the use of pluripotent stem cells. Nature Methods, 11:866-867.

Cook, L., and M. Ivanya. (2012). Bad International Relations but Better Science? Evidence from Soviet Inventors and the Boycott of the 1980 Moscow Olympics. Michigan State University working paper.

Cozzens, S., P. Regan, and B. Rubin. (2007). Final Report: NSF Workshop on Social Organization of Science and Science Policy. Available at: http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/scisip/ses_sosp_wksp_rpt.pdf [December 2013].

Dou, W., R. Chang, X. Wang, and W. Ribarsky. (2011). ParallelTopics: A probabilistic approach to exploring document collections. Proceedings of IEEE VAST:231-240.

Dou, W., X. Wang, D. Skau, and W. Ribarsky. (2012). LeadLine: Interactive visual analysis of text data through event identification and exploration. Proceedings of IEEE VAST:93-102.

Drivas, K., Z. Lei, and B. Wright. (2013a). Academic Patent Licenses: Roadblocks or Signposts for Unlicensed Innovators? Working paper.

Drivas, K., Z. Lei, and B. Wright. (2013b). Information Disclosure or Patent Grant: Which Matters More for Technology Licensing? Working paper.

Feldman, M., and A. Graddy-Reed. (2013). Accelerating commercialization: A new model of strategic foundation funding. Journal of Technology Transfer. DOI 10.1007/s10961-013-9311-

Feldman, M., and A. Graddy-Reed. (forthcoming). Local champions. In Handbook of Research on Entrepreneurs’ Transition to Philanthropy, D. Renz, R. Strom, and M. Taylor (eds.). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Finn, M.G. (2012). Stay Rates of Foreign Doctorate Recipients from U.S. Universities, 2009. Science Education Programs, Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education. Working paper.

Fisher, E., and D. Schuurbiers. (2013). Midstream Modulation. In Opening Up the Laboratory: Approaches for Early Engagement with New Technology, I. van de Poel, M. E. Gorman, N. Doorn, and D. Schuurbiers (eds.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.

Flipse, S., M. van der Sanden, and P. Osseweijer. (2012). Midstream modulation in biotechnology industry: Redefining what is ‘Part of the Job’ of researchers in industry. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19(3):1-24.

Freeman, R. (2006). Investing in the Best and Brightest: Increased Fellowship Support for American Scientists and Engineers. The Hamilton Project, Brookings Institution. Available at: http://www.hamiltonproject.org/files/downloads_and_links/Investing_in_the_Best_and_Brightest-_Increased_Fellowship_Support_for_American_Scientists_and_Engineers.pdf [January 2014].

Freeman, R. (2012). Collaborating with People Like me. Presentation at the SciSIP PI Conference, Washington, DC, September 20-21.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2014. Science of Science and Innovation Policy: Principal Investigators' Conference Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18741.
×

Fu, K., J. Chan, C. Schunn, and J. Cagan. (2013). Expert representation of design repository space: A comparison to and validation of algorithmic output. Design Studies, 34(6):729-762.

Fu, K., J. Chan, J. Cagan, K. Kotovsky, C. Schunn, and K. Wood. (2013). The meaning of “near” and “far”: The impact of structuring design databases and the effect of distance of analogy on design output. Journal of Mechanical Design, 135(2):021007.

Fuchs, E. (2013). On the Relationship between Manufacturing and Innovation: Why not all Technologies are Created Equal. Carnegie Mellon Working Paper.

Fuchs, E., and R. Kirchain. (2010). Design for location? The impact of manufacturing off-shore on technology competitiveness in the optoelectronics industry. Management Science, 56(12):2323-2349.

Fuchs, E., F. Field, R. Roth, and R. Kirchain. (2011). Plastic cars in China? The significance of production location over markets for technology competitiveness. International Journal of Production Economics, 132:79-92.

Gertner, J. (2012). The Idea Factory: Bell Labs and the Great Age of American Innovation. New York: Penguin Press.

Gibbons, M., C. Limoges, H. Nowotny, S. Schwartzman, P. Scott, and M. Trow. (1994). The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Griffiths, T. L., C. Kemp, and J. B. Tenenbaum. (2008). Bayesian models of cognition. In Ron Sun (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of computational psychology, 59-100. Cambridge University Press.

Haeussler, C., L. Jiang, J. Thursby, and M. Thursby. (2013). Specific and general information sharing among competing academic researchers. Research Policy, 43(3):465-475.

Heinze, T., P. Shapira, J. Senker, and S. Kuhlmann. (2007). Identifying creative research accomplishments: Methodology and results for nanotechnology and human genetics. Scientometrics, 70(1):125-152.

Husbands Fealing, K., J.I. Lane, J. Marburger, III, and S. Shipp (eds.). (2011). The Science of Science Policy: A Handbook. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Kleinman, D.L., N.W. Feinstein, and G. Downey. (2012). Beyond commercialization: Science, higher education and the culture of neoliberalism. Science & Education, 4:1-17.

Kremer, M. (2001). Creating new markets for vaccine, Part I: Rationale. In Innovation Policy and the Economy, Vol. 1, pp. 35-72, A.B. Jaffe, J. Lerner, and S. Stern, eds. National Bureau of Economic Research. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Lakhani, K.R., and L.B. Jeppesen. (2007). Getting unusual suspects to solve R&D puzzles. Harvard Business Review, 85(5):30-32.

Landauer, T.K., P.W. Foltz, and D. Laham. (1998). An introduction to latent semantic analysis, Discourse Processes, 25:2-3, 259-284.

Lane, J. (2010). Let’s make science metrics more scientific. Nature, 464(7288):488-489.

Lane, J. (2012). Big Data, Science Metrics, and the Role of Science Policy. Presentation at the SciSIP PI Conference, Washington, DC, September 20-21.

Leahey, E. (2012). Shaping Scientific Work: The Organization of Knowledge Communities. Commissioned paper written for the Steering Committee on the

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2014. Science of Science and Innovation Policy: Principal Investigators' Conference Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18741.
×

Science of Science and Innovation Policy Principal Investigators’ Conference. Committee on National Statistics, National Research Council.

Marburger, J., III. (2005). Speech at the American Association for the Advancement of Science Forum. Available at: http://scienceofsciencepolicy.net/reference/marburger-speech-aaas-forum-science-and-technology-policy.

Maskus, K., A. Mobarak, and E. Stuen. (2013). Doctoral students and U.S. immigration policy. Science, 324:562-563.

McCormick, J., J. Owen-Smith, and C. Scott. (2009). Distribution of human embryonic stem cell lines: Who, when, and where. Cell Stem Cell, 4:107–110.

Mell, P., and T. Grance. (2011). The NIST Definition of Cloud Computing. NIST Special Publication 800-145. Available at: http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-145/SP800-145.pdf [December 2013].

Moser, P. (2004). Determinants of innovation evidence from 19th century World Fairs. The Journal of Economic History, 64(2):548-552.

Moser, P. (2005). How do patent laws influence innovation? Evidence from nineteenth-century World’s Fairs. American Economic Review, 94:1214-1236.

Moser, P., and P.W. Rhode. (2011). Did Plant Patents Create the American Rose? (No. w16983). National Bureau of Economic Research.

National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. (2007). Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Future. Committee on Prospering in the Global Economy of the 21st Century: An Agenda for American Science and Technology. Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

National Bureau of Economic Research. (1962). The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Available at: http://papers.nber.org/books/univ62-1 [November 2013].

National Research Council. (2005). Measuring Research and Development Expenditures in the U.S. Economy. L.D. Brown, T.J. Plewes, and M.A. Gerstein, editors, Panel on Research and Development Statistics at the National Science Foundation, Committee on National Statistics. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

National Research Council. (2012a). Research Universities and the Future of America: Ten Breakthrough Actions Vital to our Nation’s Security and Prosperity. Committee on Research Universities, Board on Higher Education and Workforce, Policy and Global Affairs Division. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

National Research Council. (2012b). Rising to the Challenge: U.S. Innovation Policy for the Global Economy. C.W. Wessner and A.W. Wolff, editors, Committee on Comparative National Innovation Policies: Best Practice for the 21st Century, Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy, Policy and Global Affairs Division. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

National Science and Technology Council. (2010). The Science of Science Policy: A Federal Research Roadmap. Available at:

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2014. Science of Science and Innovation Policy: Principal Investigators' Conference Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18741.
×

http://www.scienceofsciencepolicy.net/sites/all/themes/sosp_theme3/userfiles/SoSP_Roadmap.pdf [January 2014].

National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resource Statistics. (2006). Advancing Measures of Innovation: Knowledge Flows, Business Metrics, and Management Strategies. Available at: http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/scisip/srs_innov_metrics_wkshp.pdf [December 2013].

Nguyen, M-H. (2013). Contextual privacy. Presented at the Federal Trade Commission Workshop, Internet of Things: Privacy and Security in a Connected World, November 19, 2013. Available at: http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/events-calendar/2013/11/internet-things-privacy-and-security-connected-world [January 2014].

Oh, S., Z. Lei, W-C. Lee, and J. Yen (2014). Patent evaluation based on technological trajectory revealed in relevant prior patents. Presented at the 18th Pacific-Asia Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (PAKDD 2014), Tainan, Taiwan, May 13-16.

Oh, S., Z. Lei, W-C. Lee, P. Mitra, and J. Yen. (2013). CV-PCR: A context-guided value-driven framework for patent citation recommendation. Presented at the ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM 2013), San Francisco, CA, October.

Owen-Smith, J., and J. McCormick. (2006). An international gap in human embryonic stem cell research. Nature Biotechnology, 24(4):391-392.

Owen-Smith, J., C. Scott, and J. McCormick. (2012). Expand and regularize funding for human embryonic stem cell research. Journal of Policy Analysis & Management, 31(1):714-729.

Paletz, S., and C. Schunn. (2010). A social-cognitive framework of multidisciplinary team innovation. Topics in Cognitive Science, 2:73-95.

Paletz, S., C. Schunn, and K. Kim. (2013). The interplay of conflict and analogy in multidisciplinary teams. Cognition, 126:1-19.

Pienta, A., G. Alter, and J. Lyle. (2011). The enduring value of social science research: The use and reuse of primary research data. iPRES2011 Proceedings.

Porter, A., and Rafols, I. (2012). Interdisciplinarity: Its Bibliometric Evaluation and Its Influence in Research Outputs. Presentation at the SciSIP PI Conference, Washington, DC, September 20-21.

Ribarsky, W. (2012). Analyzing the Impact of Science Funding Programs on the Evolution of Research Fields. Presentation at the SciSIP PI Conference, Washington, DC, September 20-21.

Rodríguez, H., E. Fisher, and D. Schuurbiers. (2013). Integrating science and society in European Framework Programmes: Trends in project-level solicitations. Research Policy, 42:1126-1137.

Sarewitz, D. (2007). Does science policy matter? Issues in Science and Technology, Summer:31-38.

Sarewitz, D. (2012). Extracting and Assessing the Public Values of Science and Innovation Policies: Or, Moving from Outputs to Outcomes in SIP Assessment. Presentation at the SciSIP PI Conference, Washington, DC, September 20-21.

Schunn, C.D., P.B. Paulus, J. Cagan, and K. Wood. (2006). Final Report from the NSF Innovation and Discovery Workshop: The Scientific Basis of Individual and Team

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2014. Science of Science and Innovation Policy: Principal Investigators' Conference Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18741.
×

Innovation and Discovery. Available at: http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/scisip/bcs_sosp_wkshp_rpt.pdf [November 2013].

Scott, C., J. McCormick, and J. Owen-Smith. (2009). And then there were two: Use of hESC lines. Nature Biotechnology, 27(8):696-697.

Scott, C., J. McCormick, M. DeRouen, and J. Owen-Smith. (2011). Democracy derived: New trajectories in pluripotent stem cell research. Cell, 145(6):820-826.

Shneiderman, B., C. Dunne, P. Sharma, and P. Wang. (2012). Innovation trajectories for information visualizations: Comparing treemaps, cone trees, and hyperbolic trees. Information Visualization, 11(2):87-105.

Simonton, D. (2012). Assessing Scientific Creativity: Conceptual Analyses of Assessment Complexities. Commissioned paper written for the Steering Committee on the Science of Science and Innovation Policy Principal Investigators’ Conference. Committee on National Statistics, National Research Council.

Stokes, D.E. (1997). Pasteur’s Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Stuen, E. (2013). Aggregate evidence of localized academic knowledge transfer in the U.S. Economics Bulletin, 33:1468-1478.

Stuen, E., A. Mobarak, and K. Maskus. (2012). Skilled immigration and innovation: Evidence from enrolment fluctuations in US doctoral programmes. The Economic Journal, 122:1143-1176.

Sturgeon, T., P. Nielsen, G. Linden, G. Gereffi, and C. Brown. (2011). Direct measurement of global value chains: collecting product- and firm-level statistics on value added and business function outsourcing and offshoring. Chapter 9 in the World Bank volume The Fragmentation of Global Production and Trade in Value-Added - Developing New Measures of Cross Border Trade, based on a Trade Workshop held at World Bank Headquarters, June 9-10, 2011.

Sun, J., and P. Wang. (2012). Community ecology for innovation concept: The case of cloud computing. In Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Orlando, FL.

Taylor, M.Z., and S. Wilson. (2012). Does culture still matter? The effects of individualism on national innovation rates. Journal of Business Venturing, 27:234-247.

Teich, A.H. (2012). Making Policy Research Relevant to Policy. Commissioned paper written for the Steering Committee on the Science of Science and Innovation Policy Principal Investigators’ Conference. Committee on National Statistics, National Research Council.

Teich, A.H., and I.Q. Feller. (2009). Toward a Community of Practice: Report on the AAAS-NSF SciSIP Grantees Workshop, March 24-25, 2009. American Association for the Advancement of Science report. Available at: http://www.aaas.org/spp/scisip/scisip_report.pdf [November 2013].

Teich, A.H., and I.Q. Feller. (2011). Building a Community of Practice II: Report on the Second AAAS-NSF SciSIP Workshop, October 19, 2010. American Association for the Advancement of Science report. Available at: http://www.aaas.org/spp/scisip/scisip_report2010.pdf [November 2013].

Yang, C., R. Nugent, and E. Fuchs. (2013). Gains from Other’s Losses: Technology Trajectories and the Global Division of Firms. Carnegie Mellon Working Paper.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2014. Science of Science and Innovation Policy: Principal Investigators' Conference Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18741.
×

Young, N., J. Ioannidis, and O. Al-Ubaydli. (2008). Why current publication practices may distort science. PLoS Medicine, 5(10):e201.

Youtie, J. (2012). Highly Creative Researchers’ Careers in Context. Presentation at the SciSIP PI Conference, Washington, DC, September 20-21.

Youtie, J., P. Shapira, and J. Rogers. (2009). Blind matching versus matchmaking:

Comparison group selection for creative researchers. In IEEE Conference Proceedings, Science and Innovation Policy, 2009 Atlanta Conference (downloaded on 09.09.11). Available at: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabsall.jsp?arnumber=5367848.

Youtie, J., J. Rogers, T. Heinze, P. Shapira, and L. Tang. (2013). Career-based influences on scientific recognition in the United States and Europe: Longitudinal evidence from curriculum vitae data. Research Policy, 42:1341-1355.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2014. Science of Science and Innovation Policy: Principal Investigators' Conference Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18741.
×

This page intentionally left blank.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2014. Science of Science and Innovation Policy: Principal Investigators' Conference Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18741.
×
Page 81
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2014. Science of Science and Innovation Policy: Principal Investigators' Conference Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18741.
×
Page 82
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2014. Science of Science and Innovation Policy: Principal Investigators' Conference Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18741.
×
Page 83
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2014. Science of Science and Innovation Policy: Principal Investigators' Conference Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18741.
×
Page 84
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2014. Science of Science and Innovation Policy: Principal Investigators' Conference Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18741.
×
Page 85
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2014. Science of Science and Innovation Policy: Principal Investigators' Conference Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18741.
×
Page 86
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2014. Science of Science and Innovation Policy: Principal Investigators' Conference Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18741.
×
Page 87
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2014. Science of Science and Innovation Policy: Principal Investigators' Conference Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18741.
×
Page 88
Next: Appendix A: Conference Agenda and Participants »
Science of Science and Innovation Policy: Principal Investigators' Conference Summary Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $42.00 Buy Ebook | $33.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The National Science Foundation developed the Science of Science and Innovation Policy program (SciSIP) in 2006 to fund basic and applied research that bears on and can help guide public- and private-sector policy making for science and innovation. By design, SciSIP has engaged researchers from many domains in the development of a community of practice who work together to continually develop frameworks, tools, and datasets for implementing science and innovation policy. Since its inception, the SciSIP program has funded more than 150 researchers and their graduate students. The program also contributed to the initiation of the STAR METRICS (Science and Technology for America's Reinvestment: Measuring the Effect of Research on Innovation, Competitiveness and Science) program, a collaborative effort between the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health. The STAR METRICS program develops tools and mechanisms for measuring federal expenditures on scientific activities, with particular focus on quantifying productivity and employment outcomes.

Science of Science and Innovation Policy summarizes a public conference convened by the Committee on National Statistics of the National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council to present research funded by SciSIP and foster intellectual exchange among funded researchers, science, technology, and innovation policy practitioners, and other members of the science community. The conference highlighted advances in the emerging field of the science of science and innovation policy, in particular, models, frameworks, tools, and datasets comprising the evidentiary basis for science and innovation policy. This report focuses on return on investment models; organizational structures that foster accelerated scientific productivity; linkages between commercialized scientific knowledge and job creation; the roles of universities and government in technology transfer and innovation; technology diffusion and economic growth; non-economic impacts of science and innovation expenditures; regional and global networks of knowledge generation and innovation; mechanisms for encouraging creativity and measuring outputs and outcomes from transformative research; and development, manipulation and visualization of data representing scientific activities.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!