The economics of science aims to increase the "truth per dollar" of scientific spending. To achieve this, it is essential to understand past and current reward structures in science. This essay reviews what economists have learned about scientists' behavior and the reward structure of science. The primary thesis is that economists' utility-maximizing models and econometric tools are necessary for a complete understanding of science's advancement and scientists' behavior. The essay is written for non-economists and has several goals: to survey the literature, examine economists' progress in understanding science, integrate knowledge about science's reward structure, and identify areas needing further research. Positive economics, which focuses on descriptive and causal knowledge, is the focus of this research. This approach allows for a more tractable analysis and is necessary before making normative or prescriptive decisions. Understanding past successful institutions or methodologies is key to effectively reforming scientific institutions. Case studies from historians, anthropologists, and sociologists contribute to this foundation, as do economists' models and data analysis tools. Another interpretation of "economics of science" is economic impact analysis of scientific developments, which is not the focus here. Instead, this essay focuses on understanding scientists and scientific institutions. The review begins with a survey of existing literature on economic explanations of scientists' behavior and scientific institutions. Topics include human capital, implicit contracts, tenure, and the nonprofit organization view of universities. The essay also discusses econometric literature on scientific institutions, production, earnings functions, and minority scientists' earnings and status. Finally, it highlights research on how science contributes to technology and economic growth, using theory, case studies, and econometric analysis.The economics of science aims to increase the "truth per dollar" of scientific spending. To achieve this, it is essential to understand past and current reward structures in science. This essay reviews what economists have learned about scientists' behavior and the reward structure of science. The primary thesis is that economists' utility-maximizing models and econometric tools are necessary for a complete understanding of science's advancement and scientists' behavior. The essay is written for non-economists and has several goals: to survey the literature, examine economists' progress in understanding science, integrate knowledge about science's reward structure, and identify areas needing further research. Positive economics, which focuses on descriptive and causal knowledge, is the focus of this research. This approach allows for a more tractable analysis and is necessary before making normative or prescriptive decisions. Understanding past successful institutions or methodologies is key to effectively reforming scientific institutions. Case studies from historians, anthropologists, and sociologists contribute to this foundation, as do economists' models and data analysis tools. Another interpretation of "economics of science" is economic impact analysis of scientific developments, which is not the focus here. Instead, this essay focuses on understanding scientists and scientific institutions. The review begins with a survey of existing literature on economic explanations of scientists' behavior and scientific institutions. Topics include human capital, implicit contracts, tenure, and the nonprofit organization view of universities. The essay also discusses econometric literature on scientific institutions, production, earnings functions, and minority scientists' earnings and status. Finally, it highlights research on how science contributes to technology and economic growth, using theory, case studies, and econometric analysis.