Knowledge Independence Breeds Disruption but Limits Recognition

Recombinant growth theory highlights the pivotal role of cumulative knowledge in driving innovation. Although interconnected knowledge facilitates smoother dissemination, its connection to scientific disruption remains poorly understood. Here, we quantify knowledge dependence based on the degree to which references within a given paper's bibliography cite one another. Analyzing 53.8 million papers spanning six decades, we observe that papers built on independent knowledge have decreased over time. However, propensity score matching and regression analyses reveal that such papers are associated with greater scientific disruption, as those who cite them are less likely to cite their references. Moreover, a team's preference for independent knowledge amplifies its disruptive potential, regardless of team size, geographic distance, or collaboration freshness. Despite the disruptive nature, papers built on independent knowledge receive fewer citations and delayed recognition. Taken together, these findings fill a critical gap in our fundamental understanding of scientific innovation, revealing a universal law in peer recognition: Knowledge independence breeds disruption at the cost of impact.