[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_8571.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Linguistic Metrics for Patent Disclosure: Evidence from University versus Corporate Patents

Author

Listed:
  • Nancy Kong
  • Uwe Dulleck
  • Adam Jaffe
  • Shupeng Sun
  • Sowmya Vajjala
Abstract
Encouraging inventors to disclose new inventions is an important economic justification for the patent system, yet the technical information contained in patent applications is often inadequate and unclear. This paper proposes a novel approach to measure disclosure in patent applications using algorithms from computation allinguistics. Borrowing methods from the literature on second language acquisition, we analyze core linguistic features of 40,949 U.S. applications in three patent categories related to nanotechnology, batteries, and electricity from 2000 to 2019. Relying on the expectation that universities have more incentives to disclose their inventions than corporations for either incentive reasons or for different source documents that patent attorneys can draw on, we confirm the relevance and usefulness of the linguistic measures by showing that university patents are more readable. Combining the multiple measures using principal component analysis, we find that the gap in disclosure is 0.4 SD, with a wider gap between top applicants. Our results do not change after accounting for the heterogeneity of inventions by controlling for cited-patent fixed effects. We also explore whether one pathway by which corporate patents become less readable is use of multiple examples to mask the “best mode” of inventions. By confirming that computational linguistic measures are useful indicators of readability of patents, we suggest that the disclosure function of patents can be explored empirically in a way that has not previously been feasible.

Suggested Citation

  • Nancy Kong & Uwe Dulleck & Adam Jaffe & Shupeng Sun & Sowmya Vajjala, 2020. "Linguistic Metrics for Patent Disclosure: Evidence from University versus Corporate Patents," CESifo Working Paper Series 8571, CESifo.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_8571
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp8571.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Patrick Gaulé, 2018. "Patents and the Success of Venture‐Capital Backed Startups: Using Examiner Assignment to Estimate Causal Effects," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(2), pages 350-376, June.
    2. Joseph P. Romano & Michael Wolf, 2005. "Stepwise Multiple Testing as Formalized Data Snooping," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(4), pages 1237-1282, July.
    3. Matthew Gentzkow & Bryan Kelly & Matt Taddy, 2019. "Text as Data," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 57(3), pages 535-574, September.
    4. Mikko Packalen & Jay Bhattacharya, 2015. "New Ideas in Invention," NBER Working Papers 20922, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. David Card & Stefano DellaVigna & Patricia Funk & Nagore Iriberri, 2020. "Are Referees and Editors in Economics Gender Neutral?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(1), pages 269-327.
    6. Sampat, Bhaven N., 2006. "Patenting and US academic research in the 20th century: The world before and after Bayh-Dole," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 772-789, July.
    7. Tim Loughran & Bill Mcdonald, 2016. "Textual Analysis in Accounting and Finance: A Survey," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 1187-1230, September.
    8. Sam Arts & Bruno Cassiman & Juan Carlos Gomez, 2018. "Text matching to measure patent similarity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 62-84, January.
    9. Bryan Kelly & Dimitris Papanikolaou & Amit Seru & Matt Taddy, 2021. "Measuring Technological Innovation over the Long Run," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 303-320, September.
    10. Stephen Hansen & Michael McMahon & Andrea Prat, 2018. "Transparency and Deliberation Within the FOMC: A Computational Linguistics Approach," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(2), pages 801-870.
    11. Lea Helmers & Franziska Horn & Franziska Biegler & Tim Oppermann & Klaus-Robert Müller, 2019. "Automating the search for a patent’s prior art with a full text similarity search," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-17, March.
    12. Grossman, Sanford J & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1980. "On the Impossibility of Informationally Efficient Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 393-408, June.
    13. Jasmin Kantarevic & Boris Kralj, 2013. "Link Between Pay For Performance Incentives And Physician Payment Mechanisms: Evidence From The Diabetes Management Incentive In Ontario," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(12), pages 1417-1439, December.
    14. Alice H. Wu, 2018. "Gendered Language on the Economics Job Market Rumors Forum," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 108, pages 175-179, May.
    15. Rebecca Henderson & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 1998. "Universities As A Source Of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis Of University Patenting, 1965-1988," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(1), pages 119-127, February.
    16. Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson & Adam Jaffe, 1997. "University Versus Corporate Patents: A Window On The Basicness Of Invention," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 19-50.
    17. Suzanne Scotchmer & Jerry Green, 1990. "Novelty and Disclosure in Patent Law," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 131-146, Spring.
    18. Bhaven N. Sampat, 2018. "A Survey of Empirical Evidence on Patents and Innovation," NBER Working Papers 25383, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, April.
    20. Haris Tabakovic & Thomas G. Wollmann, 2018. "From Revolving Doors to Regulatory Capture? Evidence from Patent Examiners," NBER Working Papers 24638, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Josh Feng & Xavier Jaravel, 2020. "Crafting Intellectual Property Rights: Implications for Patent Assertion Entities, Litigation, and Innovation," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(1), pages 140-181, January.
    22. Francesca Cornelli & Mark Schankerman, 1999. "Patent Renewals and R&D Incentives," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 30(2), pages 197-213, Summer.
    23. Alexei Onatski, 2010. "Determining the Number of Factors from Empirical Distribution of Eigenvalues," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(4), pages 1004-1016, November.
    24. Deepak Hegde & Kyle Herkenhoff & Chenqi Zhu, 2023. "Patent Publication and Innovation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 131(7), pages 1845-1903.
    25. John P. WALSH & NAGAOKA Sadao, 2009. "Who Invents?: Evidence from the Japan-U.S. inventor survey," Discussion papers 09034, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    26. Lawrence, Alastair, 2013. "Individual investors and financial disclosure," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 130-147.
    27. Baruffaldi, Stefano H. & Simeth, Markus, 2020. "Patents and knowledge diffusion: The effect of early disclosure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(4).
    28. Hengel, E., 2017. "Publishing while Female. Are women held to higher standards? Evidence from peer review," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1753, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    29. Cohen, Wesley M. & Goto, Akira & Nagata, Akiya & Nelson, Richard R. & Walsh, John P., 2002. "R&D spillovers, patents and the incentives to innovate in Japan and the United States," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1349-1367, December.
    30. Erin Hengel, 2022. "Publishing While Female: are Women Held to Higher Standards? Evidence from Peer Review," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(648), pages 2951-2991.
    31. Kitch, Edmund W, 1977. "The Nature and Function of the Patent System," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(2), pages 265-290, October.
    32. Alexandre Belloni & Victor Chernozhukov & Christian Hansen, 2014. "Inference on Treatment Effects after Selection among High-Dimensional Controlsâ€," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 81(2), pages 608-650.
    33. Iain M. Cockburn & Samuel Kortum & Scott Stern, 2002. "Are All Patent Examiners Equal? The Impact of Examiner Characteristics," NBER Working Papers 8980, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    34. Hsu, David H. & Hsu, Po-Hsuan & Zhou, Tong & Ziedonis, Arvids A., 2021. "Benchmarking U.S. university patent value and commercialization efforts: A new approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    35. Robert Tibshirani, 2011. "Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso: a retrospective," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 73(3), pages 273-282, June.
    36. Ashtor, Jonathan H., 2022. "Modeling patent clarity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(2).
    37. Tauman, Yair & Weng, Ming-Hung, 2012. "Selling patent rights and the incentive to innovate," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 114(3), pages 241-244.
    38. Ryan Whalen & Alina Lungeanu & Leslie DeChurch & Noshir Contractor, 2020. "Patent Similarity Data and Innovation Metrics," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(3), pages 615-639, September.
    39. Imbens,Guido W. & Rubin,Donald B., 2015. "Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521885881, September.
    40. Li, Feng, 2008. "Annual report readability, current earnings, and earnings persistence," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2-3), pages 221-247, August.
    41. Baker, Scott & Mezzetti, Claudio, 2005. "Disclosure as a Strategy in the Patent Race," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 48(1), pages 173-194, April.
    42. Denicolo, Vincenzo & Franzoni, Luigi Alberto, 2003. "The contract theory of patents," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 365-380, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dosi, Giovanni & Palagi, Elisa & Roventini, Andrea & Russo, Emanuele, 2023. "Do patents really foster innovation in the pharmaceutical sector? Results from an evolutionary, agent-based model," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 564-589.
    2. Büttner, Benjamin & Firat, Murat & Raiteri, Emilio, 2022. "Patents and knowledge diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    3. Ashtor, Jonathan H., 2022. "Modeling patent clarity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(2).
    4. Chávez-Bustamante, Felipe & Rojas-Mora, Julio & Wong, Sulan, 2024. "Balancing act: Navigating the tensions between patenting practices and open science in Chilean academic research," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    5. Tania Babina & Alex Xi He & Sabrina T. Howell & Elisabeth Ruth Perlman & Joseph Staudt, 2020. "The Color of Money: Federal vs. Industry Funding of University Research," NBER Working Papers 28160, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Dyer, Travis A. & Glaeser, Stephen & Lang, Mark H. & Sprecher, Caroline, 2024. "The effect of patent disclosure quality on innovation," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(2).
    7. Kyle HIGHAM & NAGAOKA Sadao, 2022. "Language Barriers and the Speed of Knowledge Diffusion," Discussion papers 22074, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Pellegrino, Gabriele & Raiteri, Emilio, 2024. "Do patents enable disclosure? Evidence from the invention secrecy act," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    2. Rockett, Katharine, 2010. "Property Rights and Invention," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 315-380, Elsevier.
    3. Kang, Yankun & Leng, Xuan & Liao, Yunxiang & Zheng, Shilin, 2024. "Information disclosure, spillovers, and knowledge accumulation," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    4. Dyer, Travis A. & Glaeser, Stephen & Lang, Mark H. & Sprecher, Caroline, 2024. "The effect of patent disclosure quality on innovation," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(2).
    5. de Souza, João Antônio Salvador & Rissatti, Jean Carlo & Rover, Suliani & Borba, José Alonso, 2019. "The linguistic complexities of narrative accounting disclosure on financial statements: An analysis based on readability characteristics," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 59-74.
    6. Simon Fritzsch & Philipp Scharner & Gregor Weiß, 2021. "Estimating the relation between digitalization and the market value of insurers," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 88(3), pages 529-567, September.
    7. Cesare Righi & Davide Cannito & Theodor Vladasel, 2023. "Continuing patent applications at the USPTO," Economics Working Papers 1855, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    8. Prithwiraj Choudhury & Martine R. Haas, 2018. "Scope versus speed: Team diversity, leader experience, and patenting outcomes for firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(4), pages 977-1002, April.
    9. Righi, Cesare & Cannito, Davide & Vladasel, Theodor, 2023. "Continuing patent applications at the USPTO," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(4).
    10. Higham, Kyle & de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Jaffe, Adam B., 2021. "Patent Quality: Towards a Systematic Framework for Analysis and Measurement," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    11. Fahd Alduais & Nashat Ali Almasria & Abeer Samara & Ali Masadeh, 2022. "Conciseness, Financial Disclosure, and Market Reaction: A Textual Analysis of Annual Reports in Listed Chinese Companies," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-22, November.
    12. Lu, Louis Y.Y. & Liu, John S., 2016. "A novel approach to identify the major research themes and development trajectory: The case of patenting research," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 71-82.
    13. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Esther Ferrándiz & Manuel Jiménez, 2022. "Effects of knowledge spillovers between competitors on patent quality: what patent citations reveal about a global duopoly," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1451-1487, October.
    14. Cesare Righi & Davide Cannito & Theodor Vladasel, 2023. "Continuing Patent Applications at the USPTO," Working Papers 1382, Barcelona School of Economics.
    15. Blankespoor, Elizabeth & deHaan, Ed & Marinovic, Iván, 2020. "Disclosure processing costs, investors’ information choice, and equity market outcomes: A review," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2).
    16. Koffi, Marlene, 2021. "Innovative ideas and gender inequality," CLEF Working Paper Series 35, Canadian Labour Economics Forum (CLEF), University of Waterloo.
    17. deGrazia, Charles A.W. & Pairolero, Nicholas A. & Teodorescu, Mike H.M., 2021. "Examination incentives, learning, and patent office outcomes: The use of examiner’s amendments at the USPTO," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(10).
    18. Nicola Baldini, 2008. "Negative effects of university patenting: Myths and grounded evidence," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 75(2), pages 289-311, May.
    19. Hain, Daniel S. & Jurowetzki, Roman & Buchmann, Tobias & Wolf, Patrick, 2022. "A text-embedding-based approach to measuring patent-to-patent technological similarity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    20. de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Palangkaraya, Alfons, 2023. "Do patent pledges accelerate innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(5).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    patent disclosure; computational linguistic analysis; readability;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K11 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Property Law
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_8571. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.