IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v52y2023i1s0048733322001457.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Standing on the shoulders of giants: How star scientists influence their coauthors

Author

Listed:
  • Betancourt, Nathan
  • Jochem, Torsten
  • Otner, Sarah M.G.

Abstract

We examine whether and when star scientist collaborations produce indirect peer effects. We theorize that a star's social status causes a collaboration to act as a prism; it reduces quality uncertainty, leading to increased recognition of coauthors' ideas. We identify two moderators of prisms, other scientists' quality uncertainty and awareness of the collaboration, and link prisms to “sleeping beauties”, articles that are initially overlooked and then rediscovered later. Empirically, we examine the effect on citations of collaborating with a star who either won, or – serving as the control group – who was nominated for but did not win, the Nobel Prize in Physics. We find that articles by the winners' coauthors (and which were published prior to the focal coauthor's first collaboration with the winner) receive a citation boost after the Nobel Prize is awarded, relative to articles by the coauthors of nominees, and that awareness and quality uncertainty moderate this effect. We further find that this difference in citations causes sleeping beauties written by the coauthors of Nobel Prize winners to be rediscovered faster. Our results clarify how star scientists' indirect peer effects impact their coauthors and, through sleeping beauties, how prisms matter for science more broadly.

Suggested Citation

  • Betancourt, Nathan & Jochem, Torsten & Otner, Sarah M.G., 2023. "Standing on the shoulders of giants: How star scientists influence their coauthors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:52:y:2023:i:1:s0048733322001457
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2022.104624
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733322001457
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2022.104624?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. George J. Borjas & Kirk B. Doran, 2015. "Prizes and Productivity: How Winning the Fields Medal Affects Scientific Output," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 50(3), pages 728-758.
    2. Fabian Waldinger, 2012. "Peer Effects in Science: Evidence from the Dismissal of Scientists in Nazi Germany," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 79(2), pages 838-861.
    3. George J. Borjas & Kirk B. Doran, 2021. "The Collapse Of The Soviet Union And The Productivity Of American Mathematicians," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Foundational Essays in Immigration Economics, chapter 11, pages 313-373, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Pierre Azoulay & Toby Stuart & Yanbo Wang, 2014. "Matthew: Effect or Fable?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(1), pages 92-109, January.
    5. Anne-Wil Harzing, 2013. "A preliminary test of Google Scholar as a source for citation data: a longitudinal study of Nobel prize winners," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 1057-1075, March.
    6. Bruce Sacerdote, 2014. "Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Analysis of Peer Effects: Two Steps Forward?," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 253-272, August.
    7. Wang, Jian & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Stephan, Paula, 2017. "Bias against novelty in science: A cautionary tale for users of bibliometric indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1416-1436.
    8. Sorenson, Olav & Fleming, Lee, 2004. "Science and the diffusion of knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1615-1634, December.
    9. Michal Brzezinski, 2015. "Power laws in citation distributions: evidence from Scopus," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(1), pages 213-228, April.
    10. Stephen J. Sauer & Melissa C. Thomas-Hunt & Patrick A. Morris, 2010. "Too Good to Be True? The Unintended Signaling Effects of Educational Prestige on External Expectations of Team Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(5), pages 1108-1120, October.
    11. Baffes, John & Vamvakidis, Athanasios, 2011. "Are you too young for the Nobel Prize?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 1345-1353.
    12. Yves Gingras & Matthew L. Wallace, 2010. "Why it has become more difficult to predict Nobel Prize winners: a bibliometric analysis of nominees and winners of the chemistry and physics prizes (1901–2007)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(2), pages 401-412, February.
    13. Higgins, Matthew J. & Stephan, Paula E. & Thursby, Jerry G., 2011. "Conveying quality and value in emerging industries: Star scientists and the role of signals in biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 605-617, May.
    14. Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "How Much Should We Trust Differences-In-Differences Estimates?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(1), pages 249-275.
    15. Pierre Azoulay & Joshua S. Graff Zivin & Jialan Wang, 2010. "Superstar Extinction," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 125(2), pages 549-589.
    16. Fan Jiang & Niancai Liu, 2018. "The hierarchical status of international academic awards in social sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(3), pages 2091-2115, December.
    17. Timothy S. Simcoe & Dave M. Waguespack, 2011. "Status, Quality, and Attention: What's in a (Missing) Name?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(2), pages 274-290, February.
    18. Agrawal, Ajay & McHale, John & Oettl, Alexander, 2017. "How stars matter: Recruiting and peer effects in evolutionary biology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 853-867.
    19. Deichmann, Dirk & Moser, Christine & Birkholz, Julie M. & Nerghes, Adina & Groenewegen, Peter & Wang, Shenghui, 2020. "Ideas with impact: How connectivity shapes idea diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    20. Hohberger, Jan, 2016. "Does it pay to stand on the shoulders of giants? An analysis of the inventions of star inventors in the biotechnology sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 682-698.
    21. Alexander Oettl, 2012. "Reconceptualizing Stars: Scientist Helpfulness and Peer Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(6), pages 1122-1140, June.
    22. Ginger Zhe Jin & Benjamin Jones & Susan Feng Lu & Brian Uzzi, 2019. "The Reverse Matthew Effect: Consequences of Retraction in Scientific Teams," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(3), pages 492-506, July.
    23. Bruno S. Frey & Jana Gallus, 2017. "Towards An Economics Of Awards," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 190-200, February.
    24. Khanna, Rajat, 2021. "Aftermath of a tragedy: A star's death and coauthors’ subsequent productivity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    25. Frank T. Rothaermel & Andrew M. Hess, 2007. "Building Dynamic Capabilities: Innovation Driven by Individual-, Firm-, and Network-Level Effects," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 898-921, December.
    26. Michael Spence, 1973. "Job Market Signaling," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 87(3), pages 355-374.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Agrawal, Ajay & McHale, John & Oettl, Alexander, 2017. "How stars matter: Recruiting and peer effects in evolutionary biology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 853-867.
    2. Khanna, Rajat, 2023. "Passing the torch of knowledge: Star death, collaborative ties, and knowledge creation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    3. Lu Liu & Benjamin F. Jones & Brian Uzzi & Dashun Wang, 2023. "Data, measurement and empirical methods in the science of science," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(7), pages 1046-1058, July.
    4. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/65v9ag2jfn865abjgaljmq2qi9 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Waldinger, Fabian & Hager, Sebastian & Schwarz, Carlo, 2023. "Measuring Science: Performance Metrics and the Allocation of Talent," CEPR Discussion Papers 18248, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Clément Bosquet & Pierre-Philippe Combes & Emeric Henry & Thierry Mayer, 2022. "Peer Effects in Academic Research: Senders and Receivers," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(648), pages 2644-2673.
    7. Leone, Maria Isabella & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Natalicchio, Angelo, 2022. "Boundary spanning through external technology acquisition: The moderating role of star scientists and upstream alliances," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    8. Cristelli, Gabriele & Lissoni, Francesco, 2020. "Free movement of inventors: open-border policy and innovation in Switzerland," MPRA Paper 107433, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. John McHale & Jason Harold & Jen-Chung Mei & Akhil Sasidharan & Anil Yadav, 2023. "Stars as catalysts: an event-study analysis of the impact of star-scientist recruitment on local research performance in a small open economy," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(2), pages 343-369.
    10. Myra Mohnen, 2022. "Stars and Brokers: Knowledge Spillovers Among Medical Scientists," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 2513-2532, April.
    11. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/65v9ag2jfn865abjgaljmq2qi9 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Yadav, Anil & McHale, John & O'Neill, Stephen, 2023. "How does co-authoring with a star affect scientists' productivity? Evidence from small open economies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    13. Yutao Sun & Ying Zhang & Xiaofei Zhang, 2023. "Reconfiguring star inventors with commercialization: a case of the graphene sector," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(10), pages 5411-5440, October.
    14. Khanna, Rajat, 2021. "Aftermath of a tragedy: A star's death and coauthors’ subsequent productivity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    15. Pollok, Patrick & Lüttgens, Dirk & Piller, Frank T., 2019. "Attracting solutions in crowdsourcing contests: The role of knowledge distance, identity disclosure, and seeker status," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 98-114.
    16. Matteo Prato & Fabrizio Ferraro, 2018. "Starstruck: How Hiring High-Status Employees Affects Incumbents’ Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(5), pages 755-774, October.
    17. Asier Minondo, 2022. "Comments are welcome," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(3), pages 1565-1582, March.
    18. Prithwiraj Choudhury & Kirk Doran & Astrid Marinoni & Chungeun Yoon, 2022. "Loss of Peers and Individual Worker Performance: Evidence from H-1B Visa Denials," CESifo Working Paper Series 10152, CESifo.
    19. Ina Ganguli & Fabian Waldinger, 2024. "War and Science in Ukraine," Entrepreneurship and Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(1), pages 165-188.
    20. Christos Kolympiris & Sebastian Hoenen & Peter G. Klein, 2019. "Learning by Seconding: Evidence from National Science Foundation Rotators," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(3), pages 528-551, May.
    21. Trapido, Denis, 2015. "How novelty in knowledge earns recognition: The role of consistent identities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1488-1500.
    22. Cristelli, Gabriele & Lissoni, Francesco, 2020. "Free movement of inventors: open-border policy and innovation in Switzerland," MPRA Paper 104120, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Star scientists; Social status; Scientific collaborations; Peer effects; Sleeping beauty; Sociology of science;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:52:y:2023:i:1:s0048733322001457. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.