Matthew Effect In Science Research Articles

107 Pathway to Independence Award (K99/R00) Funding Trends and Prediction of Future NIH Research Project Funding

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The objective of this study was to use NIH RePORTER (Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools) to analyze K99 funding trends and determine if R00 to R01 or R21 achievement time correlates with the future success of an early-stage NIH-funded investigator. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: All award data were collected from NIH RePORTER. All K99 awards and funding data in this study were limited to All Clinical Departments (ACD). All researchers (n = 1,148) and awards (n = 2,022) were identified through a K99 search from FY 2007 to FY 2022 across ACD. Historic trends in K99 awards and funding from NIH Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 to FY 2022 were investigated. An R00 dataset was generated from NIH RePORTER. The K99 to R00 achievement statistics from FY 2007 to FY 2022 was investigated. NIH annual datafiles for FY 2007 to FY 2021 were aggregated to generate a master datafile of all R01 (n = 395,505) and R21 awards (n = 61,766). R01 and R21 award data were linked to the researcher previously identified through the K99 search. The connection between K99/R00 awardees and subsequent R01 or R21 awards was focused on. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: From FY 2008 to FY 2022, the number of K99 awards per year increased 123.4%, from 94 to 210. Over the same period, after correcting for inflation, the NIH K99 budget increased 127.0% while the NIH program level budget increased 17.3%. For researchers who achieved their first R01 or R21 0–3 years versus 3–6 years after the start of their R00, their average funding per year since the start of the R00 phase was $467,425 versus $290,604, respectively (p < 0.001). In summary, NIH investment in the K99 award pathway has substantially outpaced the NIH program level budget increase, and there is a strong relationship between average funding per year since the start of the R00 phase and time from R00 to R01 or R21. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Our study offers additional evidence of the Matthew effect in science, where previous success generates future success. This analysis may be useful to clinical departments as they evaluate selecting new and retaining current biomedical scientists for independent research positions.

Does the hα-index reinforce the Matthew effect in science? The introduction of agent-based simulations into scientometrics

Recently, Hirsch (2019a) proposed a new variant of the h-index called the hα-index. The hα-index was criticized by Leydesdorff, Bornmann, and Opthof (2019) . One of their most important points is that the index reinforces the Matthew effect in science. The Matthew effect was defined by Merton (1968) as follows: “the Matthew effect consists in the accruing of greater increments of recognition for particular scientific contributions to scientists of considerable repute and the withholding of such recognition from scientists who have not yet made their mark” (p. 58). We follow up on the point about the Matthew effect in the current study by using a recently developed Stata command (h_index) and R package (hindex), which can be used to simulate h-index and hα-index applications in research evaluation. The user can investigate under which conditions hα reinforces the Matthew effect. The results of our study confirm what Leydesdorff et al. (2019) expected: The hα-index reinforces the Matthew effect. This effect can be intensified if strategic behavior of the publishing scientists and cumulative advantage effects are additionally considered in the simulation.

A dynamic and multifunctional account of middle-range theories.

This article develops a novel account of middle-range theories for combining theoretical and empirical analysis in explanatory sociology. I first revisit Robert K. Merton's original ideas on middle-range theories and identify a tension between his developmental approach to middle-range theorizing that recognizes multiple functions of theories in sociological research and his static definition of the concept of middle-range theory that focuses only on empirical testing of theories. Drawing on Merton's ideas on theorizing and recent discussions on mechanism-based explanations, I argue that this tension can be resolved by decomposing a middle-range theory into three interrelated and evolving components that perform different functions in sociological research: (i) a conceptual framework about social phenomena that is a set of interrelated concepts that evolve in close connection with empirical analysis; (ii) a mechanism schema that is an abstract and incomplete description of a social mechanism; and (iii) a cluster of all mechanism-based explanations of social phenomena that are based on the particular mechanism schema. I show how these components develop over time and how they serve different functions in sociological theorizing and research. Finally, I illustrate these ideas by discussing Merton's theory of the Matthew effect in science and its more recent applications in sociology.

Toward predicting research proposal success

Citation analysis and discourse analysis of 369 R01 NIH proposals are used to discover possible predictors of proposal success. We focused on two issues: the Matthew effect in science--Merton's claim that eminent scientists have an inherent advantage in the competition for funds--and quality of writing or clarity. Our results suggest that a clearly articulated proposal is more likely to be funded than a proposal with lower quality of discourse. We also find that proposal success is correlated with a high level of topical overlap between the proposal references and the applicant's prior publications. Implications associated with the analysis of proposal data are discussed.

Older, but Wiser? “The Matthew Effect” at 50: Introduction to the Dialog

Merton’s famous essay on recognition and rewards in scientific careers, “The Matthew Effect in Science”, has reached middle age. This Dialog reflects on established research that separates the origins and the consequences of status, and recent contributions regarding the constraints of status advantages. In doing so, this collection responds to a growing scholarly debate about the returns to high status. The authors engage with Merton’s cumulative status advantage, and go further to identify downsides of increased recognition both for individuals and for the status system itself. The six articles in this Dialog evaluate the progress made towards Merton’s proposed research agenda and highlight opportunities for its extension.

Implicações éticas do efeito Mateus na ciência

O efeito Mateus é um fenômeno social que reforça a estrutura de classes da ciência. Esse artigo tem como objetivo analisar as implicações éticas do efeito Mateus na ciência, entendendo que este possui implicações éticas positivas e negativas. As implicações éticas positivas centram-se no contexto individual, beneficiando poucos indivíduos, enquanto as implicações éticas negativas focam-se na coletividade por meio do ofuscamento de cientistas talentosos, inclusive daqueles enquadrados nas minorias sociais, e do desconhecimento e/ou falta de reconhecimento por seus trabalhados científicos. Disso se depreende que as implicações éticas do efeito Mateus resultam em reforço de preconceitos e exclusões sociais no âmbito da ciência e podem influenciar negativamente no avanço no conhecimento científico.

Trends in Authorship in an Indian Pediatric Dentistry Journal: Relevance of Matthew Effect

Introduction:The maxim “rich get richer and the poor get poorer” forms the basis for Matthew effect in Science. Our goal of conducting this study was to test the hypothesis that the gap in number of publications between renowned, older authors and newer authors amongst Indian pediatric dentists widens over time as stated by the Matthew effect and possible trends in publication in Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics & Preventive Dentistry (JISPPD).Materials and methods:It was hypothesized that the Matthew effect is applicable to the work published by Indian Pedodontists in the official publication of Indian Society of Pedodontics & Preventive Dentistry (ISPPD). The names of the authors in JISPPD from 1996 to 2011 were recorded year wise and the data was entered in Microsoft excel 2007 and analyzed using SPSS software.Results:The study revealed that there were a total of 823 papers published in JISPPD during the study period (1996 to 2011) by 1142 authors. 71.6% authors had contributed only one paper and 14.4% authors had contributed two papers during the study period. Only 0.6% authors had contributed to 20 or more papers. The results revealed evidence of Matthew effect for publications in JISPPD and the effect is relatively large.Conclusions:The results of the study showed that the Matthew effect is prevalent in the publication trends in JISPPD.

ŠV. MATAS ŠALIKELĖSE: PRANAŠUMO KUMULIACIJOS TEORIJOS IR DVIEJŲ SUOMIJOS MOKSLO DRAUGIJŲ KNYGŲ SKLAIDA PRIEŠ ANTRĄJĮ PASAULINĮ KARĄ

The paper deals with the international dissemination of scholarly publications in a peripheral country before World War II. Many studies have indicated that scientific success accumulates to few prominent scholars, institutions and countries, while the actors with modest premises are left on the margins of the scholarly community. Robert Merton called this phenomenon the Matthew effect in science. Some scientists regard this effect as a pathology, whereas others consider it inevitable and advantageous. Merton himself considered that there are some countervailing processes which limit the Matthew effect. The hypothesis of this paper is that in a peripheral country like Finland, the noncommercial distribution of scholarly publications, may have served as one counterforce to the Matthew effect. The focus is on the exchange of publications which was a dominant way of distributing scholarly publications at the time. The development of the exchange relations of two Finnish learned societies indicates that the exchange balanced the competition for scientific success between major and minor countries. The exchange could open contacts with the established scientific centres, but also with young societies in small or peripheral countries. Contacts with the established scientific centres were often not as profitable as those with smaller institutions which concentrated on similar research problems.

An Economic Theory of Academic Competition: Dynamic Incentives and Endogenous Cumulative Advantages

This paper provides a simple dynamic model of academic competition. Overlap- ping generations of researchers compete for first junior and next senior positions offered by universities which are also competing to hire the best scientists. Research positions have idio- syncratic associated productivities across universities and time because agents benefit from between-generations and within-universities positive externalities and from the accumulated reputation of the employing university. This feature is intended to capture the Matthew effect in science which designates the cumulative advantages affecting academic production. We derive equilibrium scientists' efforts, wages and long run endogenous accumulative ad- vantage.

The role of the Matthew effect in science

Robert Merton observed that better known scientists tend to get more credit than less well known scientists for the same achievements; he called this the Matthew effect. Scientists themselves, even those eminent researchers who enjoy its benefits, regard the effect as a pathology: it results, they believe, in a misallocation of credit. If so, why do scientists continue to bestow credit in the manner described by the effect? This paper advocates an explanation of the effect on which it turns out to allocate credit fairly after all, while at the same time making sense of scientists’ opinions to the contrary.

The Matthew Effect in Science, II: Cumulative Advantage and the Symbolism of Intellectual Property

HE SUBJECT OF THIS ESSAY is a problem in the sociology of science that has long been of interest to me. That problem, a candid friend tells me, is somewhat obscured by the formidable title assigned to it. Yet, properly deciphered, the title is not nearly as opaque as it might at first seem. Consider first the signal emitted by the Roman numeral II in the main title. It informs us that the paper follows on an earlier one, “The Matthew Effect in Science, ” which I finally put into print a good many years ago.’ The ponderous, not to say lumpy, subtitle goes on to signal the direction of this follow-on. The first concept, cumulative advantage, applied to the domain of science, refers to the social processes through which various kinds of opportunities for scientific inquiry as well as the subsequent symbolic and material rewards for the results of that inquiry tend to accumulate for individual practitioners of science, as they do also for organizations engaged in scientific work. The concept of cumulative advantage directs our attention to the ways in which initial comparative advantages of trained capacity successive increments of 7 s

The Matthew Effect in science.

The Matthew Effect in science.

A Deductive Explanation of the Matthew Effect in Science

A deductive explanation of the Matthew Effect in science is developed from general propositions about the behaviour of individuals. This explanation is compared with Merton's functionalist explanation; the individualistic explanation is shown to be both sufficient and more general than the functionalist account.

The Matthew effect in the classroom

Summary This paper examines recent research evidence relating to the possible influence exerted by teachers’ classroom behaviour on the attitudes, aspirations and achievements of their pupils. Evidence drawn from small‐scale observational studies, large‐scale surveys and laboratory experiments is discussed in detail, and some implications for teacher training are noted. I would like to acknowledge my debt to R. K. Merton, whose paper The Matthew Effect in Science provides a most entertaining insight into the subtle and devious ways in which the scientific community determines which of its members shall be rewarded and which denied

Pre-Industrial Patterns in the Colonial Family in America: A Content Analysis of Colonial Magazines

Cartter, Allan M. 1966 An Assessment of Quality in Graduate Education. Washington, D.C.: American Council of Education. Cole, Stephen and Jonathan R. Cole. 1967 Scientific output and recognition: a study in the operation of the reward system in science. American Sociological Review 32 (June). Crane, Diana. 1965 Scientists at major and minor universities: a study of productivity and recognition. American Sociological Review 30 (October):710. Kessler, M. M. 1965 M.I.T. Technical Information Project. Physics Today 18 (March):28-36. Lazarsfeld, Paul F. and Wagner Thielens, Jr. 1958 The Academic Mind. Glencoe, Illinois, The Free Press. Merton, Robert K. 1957 Social Theory and Social Structure. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press. 1968 Matthew effect in science. Science 159 (January):56-63. Waterman, A. T. 1966 Science 151 (January):61-64. Zuckerman, Harriet A. 1965 Laureates in the United States. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Sociology, Columbia University. 1967a Patterns of name-ordering among authors of scientific papers. Read at Annual Meetings of the American Sociological Association in 1967. 1967b Nobel laureates in science: patterns of productivity, collaboration, and authorship. American Sociological Review 32 (June) :400.

The Matthew Effect in Science

This account of the Matthew effect is another small exercise in the psychosociological analysis of the workings of science as a social institution. The initial problem is transformed by a shift in theoretical perspective. As originally identified, the Matthew effect was construed in terms of enhancement of the position of already eminent scientists who are given disproportionate credit in cases of collaboration or of independent multiple discoveries. Its significance was thus confined to its implications for the reward system of science. By shifting the angle of vision, we note other possible kinds of consequences, this time for the communication system of science. The Matthew effect may serve to heighten the visibility of contributions to science by scientists of acknowledged standing and to reduce the visibility of contributions by authors who are less well known. We examine the psychosocial conditions and mechanisms underlying this effect and find a correlation between the redundancy function of multiple discoveries and the focalizing function of eminent men of science-a function which is reinforced by the great value these men place upon finding basic problems and by their self-assurance. This self-assurance, which is partly inherent, partly the result of experiences and associations in creative scientific environments, and partly a result of later social validation of their position, encourages them to search out risky but important problems and to highlight the results of their inquiry. A macrosocial version of the Matthew principle is apparently involved in those processes of social selection that currently lead to the concentration of scientific resources and talent (50).