Simonton’s (1997) model of creative productivity, based on a blind variation-selection process, predicts scientific impact can only be evaluated retrospectively, after recognition has been achieved. We tested this hypothesis using bibliometric data from the Human Factors journal, which gives an award for the best paper published each year. If Simonton’s model was correct, award winning papers would not be cited much more frequently than non-award winning papers, showing that scientific success cannot be judged prospectively. The results generally confirmed Simonton’s model. Receipt of the award increased the citation rate of articles, but accounted for only 0.8% to 1.2% of the variance in the citation rate. Consistent with Simonton’s model, the influence of the award on citation rate may reflect a selection process of an elite group of reviewers who are representative of the larger peer group that eventually determines the citation rate of the article. Consistent with Simonton’s model, author productivity accounts for far more variance in the authors’ total citation rate (58.9%) and in the citation rate of the authors’ most cited article (12.6%) than does award receipt.

Instead of a uni-dimensional, topic-based approach to classifying human factors and ergonomics (HF/E) research, we proposed that a multi-dimensional taxonomy may be more useful in describing the many connections and distinctions that can be drawn between instances of research. As a starting point, we proposed the use of five dimensions: domain, phenomenon/task, intervention, method, and theory/concepts. A small study was conducted to explore the utility of the proposed taxonomy using a data set of 55 journal papers and 3 different coders. While the study was limited in scope and was not intended to validate the proposed taxonomy, it did generate preliminary support for the general utility of a multi-dimensional taxonomy and for the specific utility of the proposed dimensions. The study also identified some difficulties associated with the development and application of such a taxonomy. In summary, the study provided motivation and guidance for further development and evaluation of a multi-dimensional taxonomy of HF/E research.