Give science and peace a chance: Speeches by Nobel laureates in the sciences, 1901-2018

Autoři: Massimiano Bucchi aff001;  Enzo Loner aff001;  Eliana Fattorini aff001
Působiště autorů: Department of Sociology and Social Research, University of Trento, Trento, Italy aff001
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(10)
Kategorie: Research Article
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223505


The paper presents the results of a quantitative analysis of speeches by Nobel laureates in the sciences (Physics, Chemistry, Medicine) at the Prize gala dinner throughout the whole history of the Prize, 1901–2018. The results outline key themes and historical trends. A dominant theme, common to most speeches, is the exaltation of science as a profession by the laureate. Since the 1970s, especially in chemistry, this element becomes more domain-specific and less related to science in general. One could speculate whether this happens chiefly in chemistry because its area of activity has been perceived to be at risk of erosion from competing fields (e.g. physics, biology). Over time, speeches become more technical, less ceremonial and more lecture-oriented. Emphasis on broad, beneficial impact of science for humanity and mankind (as emphasised in Nobel’s will) is more present in laureates’ speeches during the first half of the XXth century, while its relevance clearly declines during the last decades. Politics and its relationship with science is also a relevant topic in Nobel speeches. Particularly between the two World Wars, science is seen as terrain where nationalistic stances and fights among nations could actually find a context for peaceful competition and even cooperation.

Klíčová slova:

Bioassays and physiological analysis – Chemical elements – Image processing – Professions – Scientists – Medicinal chemistry – Quantitative analysis – Chemists


1. Bucchi M. Come vincere un Nobel. L’immagine della scienza e il suo premio più famoso. Einaudi, Torino; 2018 (eng. ed. Geniuses, Heroes and Saints: The Nobel Prize and the Public Image of Science forthcoming, MIT Press, 2019).

2. Widmalm S. Science and neutrality: The Nobel Prizes of 1919 and Scientific Internationalism in Sweden. Minerva. 1995: 33: 339–360. doi: 10.1007/BF01096517

3. Widmalm S. Introduction [to special issue on the Nobel Prize]. Minerva. 2001; 39(4): 365–372.

4. Zuckerman H. Scientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States. Transaction Publishers: New Brunswick; 1996.

5. Condit CM. The character of scientists in the Nobel Prize speeches. Public Understanding of Science. 2018; 27(4): 417–432. doi: 10.1177/0963662518756559 29720063

6. Benoit K, Watanabe K, Wang H, Nulty P, Obeng A, Müller, Matsuo A. Quanteda: An R package for the quantitative analysis of textual data. Journal of Open Source Software. 2018; 3(30): 774. doi: 10.21105/joss.00774,

7. R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria; 2014.

8. Silge J, Robinson D. Text Mining With R: A Tidy Approach. O Reilly: Sebastopol; 2017.

9. Welbers K, Van Atteveldt W, Benoit K. Text Analysis in R, Communication Methods and Measures. 2017; 11(4): 245–265. doi: 10.1080/19312458.2017.1387238

10. Gavroglu K. Appropriating the Atom at the End of the 19th Century: Chemists and Physicists at Each Other’s Throat, in Philosophers in the Laboratory, ed. by V. Mossini, Academia Nazionale di Scienze, Lettere e Arti: Modena; 1995. p. 93–106.

11. Bucchi M. Science and the Media. Alternative Routes in Scientific Communication. Routledge: London; 1998.

12. Bucchi M. Visible Scientists, Media Coverage and National Identity: Nobel Laureates in the Italian Daily Press, in Schiele B, Claessens M, Shi S (eds.). Science Communication in the World: Practices, Theories and Trends. Springer: New York; 2012. p. 259–268.

13. Blue G. Science Communication Is Culture: Foregrounding Ritual in the Public Communication of Science. Science Communication. 2019, 41(2): 243–253. doi: 10.1177/1075547018816456

14. Dudo A, Besley JC. Scientists’ Prioritization of Communication Objectives for Public Engagemen. PLOS ONE. 2016, 11(2): e0148867. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148867 26913869

15. Rakeddzon T, Segev E, Chapnik N, Yosef R, Baram-Tsabari A. Automatic jargon identifier for scientists engaging with the public and science communication educators. PLOS ONE. 2017; 12(8): e0181742. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0181742 28792945

16. Schück H. Nobel: The Man and His Prizes. 2nd rev. and enlarged edition, Elsevier: Amsterdam; 1962.

17. Crawford E. The Beginnings of The Nobel Institution. The Science Prizes, 1901–1915. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge; 1984.

18. Ziman J. Real Science. What it is, and what it means. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; 2000.

19. Nowotny H, Scott P, Gibbons M. Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in An Age of Uncertainty. Polity Press: Cambridge; 2001.

20. Bucchi M. The winner takes it all? Nobel laureates and the public image of science. Public Understanding of Science. 2018; 27(4): 390–396. doi: 10.1177/0963662518764948 29720064

Článek vyšel v časopise


2019 Číslo 10