Winning a Nobel Prize may confer an unfortunate side effect: ScienceAlert

Nobel laureates in physiology or medicine tend to reduce their research output after receiving the prestigious honor, according to a new study — suggesting that winning the prize isn’t very desirable for those who want to stay productive and relevant.

data analysis on Nobel Prize winners From 1950 to 2009, researchers from Stanford University in California and the University of Waterloo in Canada looked at three metrics: the number of papers published, the freshness of those papers (how fresh the ideas are in them), and the number of citations to other articles.

The researchers matched this data with people of the same age who had won prizes Lasker PrizeAnother highly respected medical science award. They made the comparison to minimize the risk that individuals’ ages affected the results – Nobel Prizes are often awarded late in people’s careers when they are expected to work less anyway.

On all three measures, Nobel laureates scored higher than Lasker Prize Winners Before getting the prize – and then the trend reverses. After the Nobel Prize, scientists have fallen to the same level or lower than those who won the Lasker Prize.

“These declines may reflect the transformative effects of the prize, changed incentives, or fundamentally different career arcs for medical researchers who have won a Nobel Prize,” He writes researchers in their paper.

Lasker Prize winners also saw a decrease in productivity after being formally recognized, but not as much as those who received a Nobel Prize. On average, in the 10 years after winning, Lasker Prize winners published more study each year than Nobel Prize winners.

While the data analysis is not detailed enough to prove this Cause and effect, it shows an interesting pattern. Although the implication is not that these Nobel laureates put their feet up and take it easy, there may be a discussion about how the status of the laureates has changed and the impact this has on research.

“The Nobel Prize in Medicine or Physiology provides a platform to act as ambassadors for science,” He writes Researchers. “Winners often step on this platform.”

Nobel Prize, which he founded Alfred Nobel It was first awarded in 1901, which undoubtedly raises the status of science and encourages young scientists. The question here is whether it can also cause a decline in innovative, high-quality research.

This is a very difficult call, not least because it is difficult to properly identify the benefits and drawbacks. One of the ideas the team behind this new study has had is to recognize scientists early in their careers with a Nobel Prize or other award.

The business of the future must more explicitly examine the productive implications of winning
Early Career Research Award,” He writes Researchers.

A working paper on the research has been previously published National Bureau of Economic Researchalthough it has not been peer-reviewed.