PSYCHOLOGICAL BARRIERS TO THE COMMERCIALIZATION OF MEDICAL INNOVATIONS: THE CONFLICT BETWEEN AUTHORIAL IDENTITY AND PATENT PRACTICE

Authors

  • I. S. Druzhkova Odessa National Medical University
  • V. I. Valakh Odessa National Medical University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32782/psy-visnyk/2025.2.33

Keywords:

psychological barriers, medical innovations, commercialization, authorial identity, patent practice, resistance to change, intellectual property

Abstract

The article explores the psychological barriers that arise in the process of commercializing medical innovations, particularly in the context of the conflict between a researcher’s authorial identity and the requirements of patent practice. The authors analyze mechanisms of internal resistance that emerge during the transformation of a scientific result into an object of intellectual property, when the researcher is faced with the need to adapt to legal and market-oriented frameworks. Particular attention is paid to emotional, cognitive, and motivational factors influencing the scientist’s willingness to relinquish the autonomy of ideas, reframe their identity as a free researcher, and accept the standardized logic of patenting or rights transfer. Typical patterns of identification with one’s innovation are revealed, generating dissonance between the perception of science as a public good and the commercial imperatives of innovation systems. The role of academic culture, leadership style in research institutions, and the presence of psychological support systems in overcoming resistance are examined. The authors propose a model of psychological support for innovators that includes not only legal awareness, but also targeted emotional assistance, identity reframing, and reduction of cognitive dissonance. The importance of an interdisciplinary approach is emphasized, combining psychology, intellectual property law, research ethics, and innovation management in healthcare. Special attention is given to the creation of a safe communicative environment where scientists can openly express doubts and discuss value conflicts. Such an environment not only facilitates successful innovation implementation but also helps preserve academic motivation and personal integrity. The findings may be applied in technology transfer centers, early-career researcher training, and in developing motivational strategies for innovation within medical higher education institutions.

References

Запухляк І. Б., Петрина М. Ю. Людський фактор інтелектуальних ресурсів як головний у забезпеченні готовності підприємства до змін. Актуальні проблеми інноваційної економіки. 2019. № 1. С. 17–24.

Партин, Г. О., & Загородній, А. Г. Інтелектуальний капітал суб’єкта господарювання: сутність, складники, методи оцінювання. Scientific Bulletin of Kherson State University. Series Economic Sciences, 2022, (45), 30–41.

Прес-служба Апарату Верховної Ради України. Закон про запровадження в українське законодавство «правила Болар» прийнято Верховна Рада України. 15 травня 2025. URL: https://www.rada.gov.ua/print/262191.html.

Рєпка, А. О. (2015). Психологічні особливості ставлення студентів вищого навчального закладу до інтелектуальної власності. Актуальні проблеми психології. 2015. Вип. 27, С. 511–519.

Стовпець О. В. Специфіка інтелектуальної діяльності в умовах NBIC-конвергенції: соціально-філософські аспекти дослідження інституту інтелектуальної власності. Філософія і політологія в контексті сучасної культури, 2016, 1, 226–236.

Amabile T. M. Creativity in context: Update to «The Social Psychology of Creativity».Westview Press. 1996, 336 p.

Bair, Stephanie Plamondon, «The Psychology of Patent Protection». Connecticut Law Review. 2015. 306. https://digitalcommons.lib.uconn.edu/law_review/306

Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior Univ. v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., 563 U.S. 776 2011. URL: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/563/776/

Brantnell A., Baraldi E. Understanding the roles and involvement of technology transfer offices in the commercialization of university research. Technovation, 2022, 115, 102525. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2022.102525

Csikszentmihalyi M. Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention.1996, 480 p.

Garcia Gonzalez-Moral S., Pennock E., Ewedairo O., Green E., Elgey J., Mkwashi A. MedTech innovation identification: A rapid scoping review of patent research studies to inform horizon scanning methods [Preprint].2024, medRxiv. URL: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.12.09.24318714

Khachigian L. M. Pharmaceutical patents: reconciling the human right to health with the incentive to invent. Drug discovery today, 2020, 25(7), 1135–1141. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drudis.2020.04.009

Majid A. Moderna secures partial victory in Covid vaccine dispute with Pfizer and BioNTech. The Chemical Engineer. 2024, July URL: 8https://www.thechemicalengineer.com/news/moderna-secures-partial-victory-in-covid-vaccine-dispute-withpfizer-and-biontech/

Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., 566 U.S. 66 (2012) URL: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/566/66/

Rogers E. M. Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Free Press. 2003, 453 p.

Rotenberg A., Anderson-Redick S., Kiss Z.H.T. et al. The neurotechnology patent landscape in a time of neuroethics. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 12, 633, 2025. URL: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04757-4

Sawyer K. Explaining Creativity: The Science of Human Innovation. Oxford University Press 2012, 568 p.

Van de Ven A. H., Polley D. E., Garud R., Venkataraman S. The innovation journey. Oxford University Press. 1999. 440 p.

Published

2025-07-02

How to Cite

Дружкова, І. С., & Валах, В. І. (2025). PSYCHOLOGICAL BARRIERS TO THE COMMERCIALIZATION OF MEDICAL INNOVATIONS: THE CONFLICT BETWEEN AUTHORIAL IDENTITY AND PATENT PRACTICE. Scientific Bulletin of Uzhhorod National University. Series: Psychology, (2), 186-191. https://doi.org/10.32782/psy-visnyk/2025.2.33

Issue

Section

ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY; ECONOMIC PSYCHOLOGY