Professional Standing and the Reception of Scientific Discoveries

The Matthew Effect occurs when scientists receive differential recognition for a particular scientific contribution depending on their location in the stratification system. Merton originally introduced the concept to explain the allocation of credit among authors of multiple discoveries or collaborators. In this paper the concept is generalized to apply to all scientific work. If the Matthew Effect were to operate, the reception of papers of equal quality should be influenced by the location of their authors in the stratification system. To test this gypothesis, data are drawn from several studies of similar design. In each study we control for the number of citations paper received at time 2. This enables us to look at groups of papers that were judged to be roughly equal in quality at time 2. We then see whether there were any differences in the reception of these papers at time 1 depending upon various aspects of the author's location in the stratification system. All the data indicate that assessed quality of papers at time 2 is a more important determinant of paper's initial reception than any of the stratification variables. However, the speed of diffusion of papers of equal quality is influenced by the reputation of the author based on past work that is being heavily utilized at the time of a new discovery. The Matthew Effect also operates for those scientists located at prestigious points of the social system of science. All other stratification variables, including eminence as measured by receipt of awards, did not influence the speed of diffusion. Data are presented that indicate that top papers written by high-ranking scientists are no more likely to be widely diffused early than are top papers by low-ranking scientists. However, lesser quality papers by high-ranking scientists receive greater attention than papers of equal quality by low-ranking scientists. The Matthew Effect also serves to focus attention on the work of little-known men who collaborate with scientists of high repute and to increase retroactively the visibility of the early work of scientists who to on the greater fame. A discussion is included of the relevance of these data for the study of resistance to scientific discoveries.