Table 3 shows that the flow of cita

Table 3 shows that the flow of citations to a scientist's subfield increases the likeli hood that she will be mentioned as sharing materials, but the stock decreases it. This suggests that scientists in the most rapidly growing fields are most likely to have the opportunity to share materials - they will most likely be asked. Presence of a technology transfer office also increases the likelihood that a scientist will share. It is possible that these offices, by crafting and sometimes imposing material transfer agreements (MTAs), actually facilitate sharing through regulation. In the within-scientist (fixed effect) odel, organization-level industry funding and Pi-level industry collaboration and funding all ignificantly associate with less materials sharing. If a Pi's university enters a elationship with a company, that PI will be more than 17 percent less likely to be mentioned for sharing materials in the subsequent 5 years. (This is because the exponentiated oefficient = .828 ? .051,/?