Mit’s Rise to Prominence: Outline of a Collective Biography

Abstract

The core question of MIT Economics Department's historywhy has MIT economics risen to prominence so quicklyrequires an approach to history of economics that focuses on the role of the networks within which economists operate, their ideas diffuse, and gain scientific credit. By reconstructing the network of MIT economics Ph.Ds. and their advisors, this paper furnishes not just evidence of how MIT rose to prominence as documented by the numerous ties of Nobel Laureates, Clark Medalists, elected officials of the AEA or the Council of Economic Advisors to the MIT network. The MIT Economics Department is also revealed as a community of self-replicating economists who are to a large extent trained by a few key advisers who were mostly trained at MIT as well. MIT exhibits a large share of graduates who remain in American academia that is disproportionate to the number of graduates it has produced. It is hypothesized that this has been an important factor in MIT's rise to prominence. On a methodological level this paper introduces prosopography or collective biography, a well-established historiographic method, to the field of history of economics.

Long-Term Effects from Early Exposure to Research: Evidence from the NIH "Yellow Berets"

“…This phenomenon is not limited to the physical sciences. For example, the MIT economics department stands out from those located at other universities in the extent to which it spawned a community of academics who went on to exert a profound influence on the discipline (Svorencík 2014).…”

Defining Excellence: Seventy Years of the John Bates Clark Medal

“…In our third section, we thus rely on a quantitative analysis of the trajectories and characteristics of the forty medalists to document how uniform, and increasingly so, their careers have been. This quantitative collective biography approach, while still rare in the history of economics, is known and routinely used in history under the name "prosopography" (Svorenčík 2018). Combining historical data of very different nature is not yet standard practice in our field, but as we have argued in a recent article (Cherrier and Svorenčík 2018), we nevertheless believe it offers an interesting method to overcome archival embargos and study various facets of a historical object-in the present case, a scientific prize.…”

“…The right place may, however, not just have been the right university: Harvard, MIT, or Chicago. As explained by Svorenčík (2018Svorenčík ( , 2019, each of these leading departments exhibits a core group of advisors, Throughout the 1950s to the 1980s, MIT would admit no more than twenty to twenty-five students each year. The economics graduate students' profile was different from what could be found in other universities, as it complied with the institute's requirement that every graduate student had been trained in physics and mathematics.…”

How Economists Entered the ‘Numbers Game’: Measuring Discrimination in the Us Courtrooms, 1971–1989

“… Fisher (Ph.D. Harvard, 1960) was an influential MIT faculty member, especially as a supervisor(Svorenčík 2014, Duarte 2014, and as a teacher of econometrics(Cherrier 2014, 27-28, 35-36). He testified in more than 40 antitrust cases, including the famous IBM case, dismissed in 1982.…”