The Experts below are selected from a list of 8199 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Dale Dannefer - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Cumulative Advantage IN CHANGING ECONOMIC TIMES: STRESS, DISTRESS, AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR AGING COHORTS
Innovation in Aging, 2019Co-Authors: Dale Dannefer, Stephen Crystal, Angela M. O'randAbstract:Abstract Processes of Cumulative dis/Advantage operate within cohorts and across historical time. In the ongoing dance of age, cohort and period, each cohort encounters distinctive social and economic environments at particular ages that may ameliorate or exacerbate the Cumulative and systemic processes of inequality production that operate over its collective life course. We explore issues of current and future late-life inequality and its consequences. As overall income inequality has grown, what are the likely consequences for late-life outcomes? How have cohorts currently in midlife been affected by the Great Recession of 2008 and subsequent recovery? What are the mental and physical consequences of these developments, and to what extent can they be ameliorated by interventions in middle and later adulthood? This symposium addresses how variation in economic circumstances and social and psychological stresses may affect outcomes over the life course, and how these complex, interacting processes can be best conceptualized and examined. One paper examines the impact of the Great Recession and subsequent events on the intracohort distribution of income, suggesting inordinate setbacks during the Recession with likely long-term effects for economically vulnerable subpopulations. Another explores the role of psychosocial stressors in the process of Cumulative dis/Advantage, focusing on linkages between functional limitations and psychological well-being in later life, and how these linkages are amplified by diverse dimensions of disAdvantage (e.g., education, employment; coping strategies; caregiving). A third paper examines the intergenerational dimensions of Cumulative Advantage processes. Finally, contrasting theoretical frameworks for apprehending life-course processes and historical change will be explored.
-
Cumulative Advantage/disAdvantage and the life course: cross-fertilizing age and social science theory.
The journals of gerontology. Series B Psychological sciences and social sciences, 2003Co-Authors: Dale DanneferAbstract:Age and Cumulative Advantage/disAdvantage theory have obvious logical, theoretical, and empirical connections, because both are inherently and irreducibly related to the passage of time. Over the past 15 years, these connections have resulted in the elaboration and application of the Cumulative Advantage-disAdvantage perspective in social gerontology, especially in relation to issues of heterogeneity and inequality. However, its theoretical origins, connections, and implications are not widely understood. This article reviews the genesis of the Cumulative Advantage/disAdvantage perspective in studies of science, its initial articulation with structural-functionalism, and its expanding importance for gerontology. It discusses its intellectual relevance for several other established theoretical paradigms in sociology, psychology, and economics. On the basis of issues deriving from these perspectives and from the accumulating body of work on Cumulative Advantage and disAdvantage, I identify several promising directions for further research in gerontology.
-
Cumulative Advantage disAdvantage and the life course cross fertilizing age and social science theory
Journals of Gerontology Series B-psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 2003Co-Authors: Dale DanneferAbstract:Age and Cumulative Advantage/disAdvantage theory have obvious logical, theoretical, and empirical connections, because both are inherently and irreducibly related to the passage of time. Over the past 15 years, these connections have resulted in the elaboration and application of the Cumulative Advantage-disAdvantage perspective in social gerontology, especially in relation to issues of heterogeneity and inequality. However, its theoretical origins, connections, and implications are not widely understood. This article reviews the genesis of the Cumulative Advantage/disAdvantage perspective in studies of science, its initial articulation with structural-functionalism, and its expanding importance for gerontology. It discusses its intellectual relevance for several other established theoretical paradigms in sociology, psychology, and economics. On the basis of issues deriving from these perspectives and from the accumulating body of work on Cumulative Advantage and disAdvantage, I identify several promising directions for further research in gerontology.
Orion Penner - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Inequality and Cumulative Advantage in science careers: a case study of high-impact journals
EPJ Data Science, 2014Co-Authors: Alexander M Petersen, Orion PennerAbstract:Analyzing a large data set of publications drawn from the most competitive journals in the natural and social sciences we show that research careers exhibit the broad distributions of individual achievement characteristic of systems in which Cumulative Advantage plays a key role. While most researchers are personally aware of the competition implicit in the publication process, little is known about the levels of inequality at the level of individual researchers. Here we analyzed both productivity and impact measures for a large set of researchers publishing in high-impact journals, accounting for censoring biases in the publication data by using distinct researcher cohorts defined over non-overlapping time periods. For each researcher cohort we calculated Gini inequality coefficients, with average Gini values around 0.48 for total publications and 0.73 for total citations. For perspective, these observed values are well in excess of the inequality levels observed for personal income in developing countries. Investigating possible sources of this inequality, we identify two potential mechanisms that act at the level of the individual that may play defining roles in the emergence of the broad productivity and impact distributions found in science. First, we show that the average time interval between a researcher’s successive publications in top journals decreases with each subsequent publication. Second, after controlling for the time dependent features of citation distributions, we compare the citation impact of subsequent publications within a researcher’s publication record. We find that as researchers continue to publish in top journals, there is more likely to be a decreasing trend in the relative citation impact with each subsequent publication. This pattern highlights the difficulty of repeatedly producing research findings in the highest citation-impact echelon, as well as the role played by finite career and knowledge life-cycles, and the intriguing possibility that confirmation bias plays a role in the evaluation of scientific careers.
-
Inequality and Cumulative Advantage in science careers: a case study of high-impact journals
EPJ Data Science, 2014Co-Authors: Alexander M Petersen, Orion PennerAbstract:Analyzing a large data set of publications drawn from the most competitive journals in the natural and social sciences we show that research careers exhibit the broad distributions of individual achievement characteristic of systems in which Cumulative Advantage plays a key role. While most researchers are personally aware of the competition implicit in the publication process, little is known about the levels of inequality at the level of individual researchers. We analyzed both productivity and impact measures for a large set of researchers publishing in high-impact journals. For each researcher cohort we calculated Gini inequality coefficients, with average Gini values around 0.48 for total publications and 0.73 for total citations. For perspective, these observed values are well in excess of the inequality levels observed for personal income in developing countries. Investigating possible sources of this inequality, we identify two potential mechanisms that act at the level of the individual that may play defining roles in the emergence of the broad productivity and impact distributions found in science. First, we show that the average time interval between a researcher's successive publications in top journals decreases with each subsequent publication. Second, after controlling for the time dependent features of citation distributions, we compare the citation impact of subsequent publications within a researcher's publication record. We find that as researchers continue to publish in top journals, there is more likely to be a decreasing trend in the relative citation impact with each subsequent publication. This pattern highlights the difficulty of repeatedly publishing high-impact research and the intriguing possibility that confirmation bias plays a role in the evaluation of scientific careers.
Hao Zhang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Mathematical Modeling of Cumulative Advantage for Tenure Tracking Young Scientists
Journal of Information and Computational Science, 2013Co-Authors: Malisa Taypanhyavong, Hao ZhangAbstract:Matthew effect or Cumulative Advantage (CA) has been extensively studied in academic activities. However, we are not aware of any previous work on CA modeling for tenure tracking young scientists. In this paper, the first grant reception time as an important metric in tenure promotion is analyzed and a CA model is constructed for it. The results demonstrate various relationship between the first grant reception time and other relevant parameters.
-
A Cumulative Advantage Model for Tenure Tracking Young Scientists
2012 Third Global Congress on Intelligent Systems, 2012Co-Authors: Malisa Taypanhyavong, Hao ZhangAbstract:Matthew effect or Cumulative Advantage (CA) is widely studied in all sorts of fields. It is considered as an important factor that causes inequality in labor wages, education and careers. This even greatly impacts the scientific activities including journal publication, grant application, peer recognition, promotion, etc. Numerous models are developed to analyze the CA process. However, we are not aware of any work on the analysis of CA issue encountered by young scientists at their early stage of careers in the form of tenure track. The CA process for this group has its unique characteristics and requires special treatment. Therefore, a modified CA model is constructed and its implications are also analyzed.
Delia Baldassarri - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Heuristics, Interactions, and Status Hierarchies An Agent-based Model of Deference Exchange
Sociological Methods & Research, 2014Co-Authors: Gianluca Manzo, Delia BaldassarriAbstract:Since Merton’s classical analysis of Cumulative Advantage in science, it has been observed that status hierarchies display a sizable disconnect between actors’ quality and rank and that they become...
Alexander M Petersen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Inequality and Cumulative Advantage in science careers: a case study of high-impact journals
EPJ Data Science, 2014Co-Authors: Alexander M Petersen, Orion PennerAbstract:Analyzing a large data set of publications drawn from the most competitive journals in the natural and social sciences we show that research careers exhibit the broad distributions of individual achievement characteristic of systems in which Cumulative Advantage plays a key role. While most researchers are personally aware of the competition implicit in the publication process, little is known about the levels of inequality at the level of individual researchers. Here we analyzed both productivity and impact measures for a large set of researchers publishing in high-impact journals, accounting for censoring biases in the publication data by using distinct researcher cohorts defined over non-overlapping time periods. For each researcher cohort we calculated Gini inequality coefficients, with average Gini values around 0.48 for total publications and 0.73 for total citations. For perspective, these observed values are well in excess of the inequality levels observed for personal income in developing countries. Investigating possible sources of this inequality, we identify two potential mechanisms that act at the level of the individual that may play defining roles in the emergence of the broad productivity and impact distributions found in science. First, we show that the average time interval between a researcher’s successive publications in top journals decreases with each subsequent publication. Second, after controlling for the time dependent features of citation distributions, we compare the citation impact of subsequent publications within a researcher’s publication record. We find that as researchers continue to publish in top journals, there is more likely to be a decreasing trend in the relative citation impact with each subsequent publication. This pattern highlights the difficulty of repeatedly producing research findings in the highest citation-impact echelon, as well as the role played by finite career and knowledge life-cycles, and the intriguing possibility that confirmation bias plays a role in the evaluation of scientific careers.
-
Inequality and Cumulative Advantage in science careers: a case study of high-impact journals
EPJ Data Science, 2014Co-Authors: Alexander M Petersen, Orion PennerAbstract:Analyzing a large data set of publications drawn from the most competitive journals in the natural and social sciences we show that research careers exhibit the broad distributions of individual achievement characteristic of systems in which Cumulative Advantage plays a key role. While most researchers are personally aware of the competition implicit in the publication process, little is known about the levels of inequality at the level of individual researchers. We analyzed both productivity and impact measures for a large set of researchers publishing in high-impact journals. For each researcher cohort we calculated Gini inequality coefficients, with average Gini values around 0.48 for total publications and 0.73 for total citations. For perspective, these observed values are well in excess of the inequality levels observed for personal income in developing countries. Investigating possible sources of this inequality, we identify two potential mechanisms that act at the level of the individual that may play defining roles in the emergence of the broad productivity and impact distributions found in science. First, we show that the average time interval between a researcher's successive publications in top journals decreases with each subsequent publication. Second, after controlling for the time dependent features of citation distributions, we compare the citation impact of subsequent publications within a researcher's publication record. We find that as researchers continue to publish in top journals, there is more likely to be a decreasing trend in the relative citation impact with each subsequent publication. This pattern highlights the difficulty of repeatedly publishing high-impact research and the intriguing possibility that confirmation bias plays a role in the evaluation of scientific careers.
