Matthew effect

The Matthew effect is a theory that people who have more get more, while those who have less get less; in other words, those with advantages get ahead while the disadvantaged fall further behind. The phenomenon was explained and named by sociologist Robert K. Merton in 1968. The name is from a passage in the Gospel of Matthew (25:29) in the New Testament of the Bible. Merton applied this theory to his research on the sociology of science and the tendency for people to give more credit to well-known researchers than those without name recognition regardless of the significance of their contributions to the project or paper. However, the Matthew effect theory has been widely applied to many fields and situations including early childhood education, communication and social media studies, economics, and psychology.

Background

Robert King Merton was born Meyer R. Schkolnick in South Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, in 1910. The son of immigrants from Eastern Europe used a stage name during his teen years when he performed as an amateur magician, and adopted a variation of that moniker when he went to university. His career as a sociologist involved an eclectic array of topics including how scientists act, how mass media works, race relations, literature, and etymology. His work has been cited in US Supreme Court cases and his methods of using focused interviews of small groups led professionals in politics and marketing to use focus groups in their work. However, his most famous work is the 1965 book On the Shoulders of Giants, which traces the origin of that phrase. He spent more than three decades researching serendipity; his work was published posthumously as The Travels and Adventures of Serendipity by Princeton University Press. Some of his concepts became household words, for example the self-fulfilling prophecy and role model.

Overview

Throughout his research and particularly in observing the sociology of science, Merton noted that scientists held in high regard consistently got more credit than scientists with little or no name recognition. He found this to be true when they were producing parallel research and making the same discoveries simultaneously but independently, and when a prominent scientist collaborated with lesser-known researchers as equals. The eminent scientists consistently received a greater share of the credit. Sometimes the Matthew effect is stated colloquially as “the rich get richer and the poor get poorer” and it is also known as the theory of cumulative advantage. It takes its name from the Bible verse Matthew 25:29, which according to the King James Version of the Bible states, “For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.” Merton developed his theory in part while looking at rewards scientists receive, which usually take the form of additional funding for research and awards such as Nobel Prizes. Less-tangible rewards may include access to greater knowledge through research and greater authority in their fields, both of which may open positions such as department chair and opportunities to present papers at national and international conferences.

Merton’s writings reference the “forty-first seat.” This is a reference to French novelist and poet Arsène Houssaye, who in 1855 wrote about writers excluded from the French Academy, which strictly limited membership to forty persons it called the “immortals.” He called luminaries who achieved greatness but were not accepted as members “forty-first seaters.” According to Merton, those who are making decisions about who is worthy will necessarily promote some while excluding others of equal merit and likely will exclude some more worthy than those chosen. According to Merton, when a generation includes many individuals who are accomplished, a large number will be excluded from rewards such as awards, grants, and membership in organizations. Many of these excluded individuals will be far more worthy than successful persons of generations with fewer luminaries.

The Matthew effect is often applied to education. University of Toronto professor Keith Stanovich has found studied the theory as it relates to early childhood education and how students learn to read. Those who are successful in learning to read at a young age typically go on to more success in reading, gaining new skills including expanded vocabulary and reading comprehension. Those who struggle to learn to read usually continue to struggle, falling behind more and more. Within three or four years of schooling, the divide is evident and growing. Later, when the curriculum has moved beyond learning to read and students must read to learn, the successful leaders continue to advance and the students who have not gained those skills fall behind in all subjects. The latter are much more likely to drop out of school. Educators note that children who enjoy reading read more, which helps them to become better readers, while children who dislike reading read less, which hampers their opportunities to improve reading skills. Children who improve reading skills achieve positive reinforcement of several types, including enjoyment of reading and success in the classroom, while the opposite is true of children with poor reading skills. Educational researchers and professionals characterize the latter group as being caught in a self-perpetuating downward spiral.

More modern scholarship on the theory has suggested several other factors that affect career outcomes. For example, researcher Thijs Bol and colleagues in 2018 examined science funding recipients just above and below a funding threshold and found those who were awarded grants went on to achieve nearly twice as much funding in the next eight years as those who were just short of the threshold. However, the non-winners did not compete for as many funding opportunities in that period, revealing an additional factor—participation—that contributed to the Matthew effect.

The Matthew effect and other theories about rewards are important to many academics. While the Matthew effect may describe an unfair system, the concept of “publish or perish” is often cited as a necessity among those seeking tenure, and an understanding of how researchers achieve success may aid individuals who are pursuing such goals.

Bibliography

Acar, Selcuk. “Matthew, Pygmalion, and Founder Effects.” Encyclopedia of Creativity, 2011, DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-375038-9.00141-2. Accessed 28 Dec. 2022.

Bol, Thijs, Mathijs de Vaan, and Arnout van de Rijt. “The Matthew Effect in Science Funding.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 115, no. 19, 23 Apr. 2018, pp. 4887-4890, DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1719557115. Accessed 28 Dec. 2022.

Briggs, Saga. “The Matthew Effect: What Is It and How Can You Avoid It in Your Classroom?” Open Colleges, 1 July 2013, www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/features/the-matthew-effect-what-is-it-and-how-can-you-avoid-it-in-your-classroom/. Accessed 28 Dec. 2022.

Merton, Robert K. “The Matthew Effect in Science.” Science, vol. 159, no. 3810, 5 Jan. 1968, pp. 56–63, DOI: 10.1126/science.159.3810.56. Accessed 27 Dec. 2022.

Rhodes, Matt. “The Matthew Effect—Linking and How Things Become Viral in Social Media.” Social Media Today, 13 Feb. 2010, www.socialmediatoday.com/content/matthew-effect-linking-and-how-things-become-viral-social-media. Accessed 28 Dec. 2022.

“Overcoming the Matthew Effect in Early Education.” University of West Alabama, 9 Mar. 2018, online.uwa.edu/news/matthew-effect/. Accessed 28 Dec. 2022.