Cargando…

Impact of major awards on the subsequent work of their recipients

To characterize the impact of major research awards on recipients' subsequent work, we studied Nobel Prize winners in Chemistry, Physiology or Medicine, and Physics and MacArthur Fellows working in scientific fields. Using a case-crossover design, we compared scientists’ citations, publications...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nepomuceno, Andrew, Bayer, Hilary, Ioannidis, John P. A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Royal Society 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10410203/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37564070
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.230549
_version_ 1785086404690182144
author Nepomuceno, Andrew
Bayer, Hilary
Ioannidis, John P. A.
author_facet Nepomuceno, Andrew
Bayer, Hilary
Ioannidis, John P. A.
author_sort Nepomuceno, Andrew
collection PubMed
description To characterize the impact of major research awards on recipients' subsequent work, we studied Nobel Prize winners in Chemistry, Physiology or Medicine, and Physics and MacArthur Fellows working in scientific fields. Using a case-crossover design, we compared scientists’ citations, publications and citations-per-publication from work published in a 3-year pre-award period to their work published in a 3-year post-award period. Nobel Laureates and MacArthur Fellows received fewer citations for post- than for pre-award work. This was driven mostly by Nobel Laureates. Median decrease was 80.5 citations among Nobel Laureates (p = 0.004) and 2 among MacArthur Fellows (p = 0.857). Mid-career (42–57 years) and senior (greater than 57 years) researchers tended to earn fewer citations for post-award work. Early career researchers (less than 42 years, typically MacArthur Fellows) tended to earn more, but the difference was non-significant. MacArthur Fellows (p = 0.001) but not Nobel Laureates (p = 0.180) had significantly more post-award publications. Both populations had significantly fewer post-award citations per paper (p = 0.043 for Nobel Laureates, 0.005 for MacArthur Fellows, and 0.0004 for combined population). If major research awards indeed fail to increase (and even decrease) recipients' impact, one may need to reassess the purposes, criteria, and impacts of awards to improve the scientific enterprise.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10410203
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher The Royal Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104102032023-08-16 Impact of major awards on the subsequent work of their recipients Nepomuceno, Andrew Bayer, Hilary Ioannidis, John P. A. R Soc Open Sci Science, Society and Policy To characterize the impact of major research awards on recipients' subsequent work, we studied Nobel Prize winners in Chemistry, Physiology or Medicine, and Physics and MacArthur Fellows working in scientific fields. Using a case-crossover design, we compared scientists’ citations, publications and citations-per-publication from work published in a 3-year pre-award period to their work published in a 3-year post-award period. Nobel Laureates and MacArthur Fellows received fewer citations for post- than for pre-award work. This was driven mostly by Nobel Laureates. Median decrease was 80.5 citations among Nobel Laureates (p = 0.004) and 2 among MacArthur Fellows (p = 0.857). Mid-career (42–57 years) and senior (greater than 57 years) researchers tended to earn fewer citations for post-award work. Early career researchers (less than 42 years, typically MacArthur Fellows) tended to earn more, but the difference was non-significant. MacArthur Fellows (p = 0.001) but not Nobel Laureates (p = 0.180) had significantly more post-award publications. Both populations had significantly fewer post-award citations per paper (p = 0.043 for Nobel Laureates, 0.005 for MacArthur Fellows, and 0.0004 for combined population). If major research awards indeed fail to increase (and even decrease) recipients' impact, one may need to reassess the purposes, criteria, and impacts of awards to improve the scientific enterprise. The Royal Society 2023-08-09 /pmc/articles/PMC10410203/ /pubmed/37564070 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.230549 Text en © 2023 The Authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Published by the Royal Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Science, Society and Policy
Nepomuceno, Andrew
Bayer, Hilary
Ioannidis, John P. A.
Impact of major awards on the subsequent work of their recipients
title Impact of major awards on the subsequent work of their recipients
title_full Impact of major awards on the subsequent work of their recipients
title_fullStr Impact of major awards on the subsequent work of their recipients
title_full_unstemmed Impact of major awards on the subsequent work of their recipients
title_short Impact of major awards on the subsequent work of their recipients
title_sort impact of major awards on the subsequent work of their recipients
topic Science, Society and Policy
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10410203/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37564070
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.230549
work_keys_str_mv AT nepomucenoandrew impactofmajorawardsonthesubsequentworkoftheirrecipients
AT bayerhilary impactofmajorawardsonthesubsequentworkoftheirrecipients
AT ioannidisjohnpa impactofmajorawardsonthesubsequentworkoftheirrecipients