Matthew: Effect or Fable?

Abstract

In a market context, a status effect occurs when actors are accorded differential recognition for their efforts depending on their location in a status ordering, holding constant the quality of these efforts. In practice, because it is very difficult to measure quality, this ceteris paribus proviso often precludes convincing empirical assessments of the magnitude of status effects. We address this problem by examining the impact of a major status-conferring prize that shifts actors' positions in a prestige ordering. Specifically, using a precisely constructed matched sample, we estimate the effect of a scientist becoming a Howard Hughes Medical Investigator (HHMI) on citations to articles the scientist published before the prize was awarded. We do find evidence of a post-appointment citation boost, but the effect is small and limited to a short window of time. Consistent with theories of status, however, the effect of the prize is significantly larger when there is uncertainty about article quality, and when prize-winners are of (relatively) low status at the time of election to HHMI.

Made in Academia: The Effect of Institutional Origin on Inventors’ Attention to Science

“…Inventors' attention is scarce (Simon 1947), which constitutes a hitherto understudied bottleneck at the interface between science and technology. Second, while prior studies of the informational cues used in science and innovation highlight the impact of status and certification (Merton 1968;Simcoe and Waguespack 2011;Azoulay, Stuart, and Wang 2013;Polidoro 2013), this paper highlights another cue-the academic or industrial origin of a scientific publication. Finally, this paper is the first to use simultaneous discoveries to conduct a "twin study of scientific knowledge," introducing a new method for social scientists interested in science and its dissemination.…”

“…Prior literature, by examining the role of informational cues in the cumulative processes of science and technology separately (Merton 1968;Podolny and Stuart 1995;Simcoe and Waguespack 2011;Azoulay, Stuart, and Wang 2013;Polidoro 2013), has overlooked some of the challenges that the institutional boundary raises for cumulative work across institutions. By focusing on science-based invention across academia and industry, I can identify the role of institutional origin as an informational cue and can document one way in which institutional boundaries affect cumulative work.…”

“…The imperfection of the system of communication in science has been known for decades. Most studies have focused on the cue conferred by an author's social status (Merton 1968;Simcoe and Waguespack 2011;Azoulay, Stuart, and Wang 2013). The underlying idea is straightforward: since scientists cannot possibly keep track of the entire scientific literature, they use the status of the authors to assess how much attention a publication deserves.…”

“…Inventors' attention is therefore likely to constitute a critical bottleneck at the interface between science and technology. To navigate the scientific literature, inventors are likely to rely on informational cues drawn from those attributes of a publication that are easily observable (Merton 1968;Simcoe and Waguespack 2011;Azoulay, Stuart, and Wang 2013;Polidoro 2013). Inventors might then pay particular attention to scientific publications that carry specific cues while ignoring others that carry different cues, even if their contents are very similar.…”

The Role of Conferences on the Pathway to Academic Impact: Evidence from a Natural Experiment

“…5 See Merton (1968), Azoulay et al (2013). 6 See for example, Winnik et al (2012); Galang et al (2011); Lee et al (2012);Toma et al (2006).…”