Abstract
This article analyzes the relationship between age and scientific productivity at Norwegian universities. Cross-sectional data indicate that publishing activity reaches a peak in the 45–49 year old age group and declines by 30 per cent among researchers over 60 years old. Large differences exist, however, between fields of learning. In the social sciences productivity remains more or less at the same level in all age groups. In the humanities publishing activity declines in the 55–59 year old age group, but it reaches a new peak in the group 60 years old and over. Productivity declines in the medical sciences among faculty members who are older than 55, while in the natural sciences, productivity continually decreases with increasing age.
This article suggests that the differences between the various fields of learning arise from corresponding differences in the development of scientific disciplines. In fields where the production of new knowledge is fast and where new scientific methods and equipment are continuously introduced, researchers may have problems coping and thus become obsolescent. In fields where knowledge production occurs at a slower pace, e.g. the social sciences and the humanities, faculty may be productive throughout their careers. This explanation gains further support when looking at various natural and medical science disciplines. Older faculty members in physics are less productive than older researchers in mathematics, and older scientists in biomedicine are less productive than their colleagues of the same age in social medicine.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allison, P. D. and J. A. Stewart (1974): “Productivity Differences among Scientists: Evidence for Accumulative Advantage”. American Sociological Review. Vol. 39, 596–606.
Allison, P. D., J. S. Long and T. K. Krauze (1982): “Cumulative Advantage and Inequality in Science”, American Sociological Review. Vol. 47, 615–625.
Bayer, A. E. and J. E. Dutton (1977): “Career Age and Research - Professional Activities of Academic Scientists”. Journal of Higher Education. Vol. 48, 259–282.
Blackburn, R. T., C. E. Behymer and D. E. Hall (1978): “Research Note: Correlates of Faculty Publications”. Sociology of Education. Vol. 51, 132–141.
Broad, W. J. (1981): “The Publishing Game: Getting More for Less”. Science. Vol. 211, 1137–1139.
Cole, S. (1979): “Age and Scientific Performance”. American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 84, 958–977.
Dennis, W. (1966): “Creative Productivity between the Ages of 20 and 80 Years”. Journal of Gerontology. Vol. 21, 1–8.
Diamond, A. M. (1984): “An Economic Model of the Life-Cycle Research Productivity of Scientists”. Scientometrics. Vol. 6, 189–196.
Faia, M. A. (1975): “Productivity among Scientists: A Replication and Elaboration”. American Sociological Review. Vol. 40, 825–829.
Hagstrom, W. O. (1965): The Scientific Community. New York: Basic Books.
Halsey, A. H. and M. Trow (1971): The British Academics. London: Faber & Faber.
Hays, W. L. (1970): Statistics. London: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Knorr, K. D., R. Mittermeir, G. Aichholzer and G. Waller (1979): “Individual Publication Productivity as a Social Position Effect in Academic and Industrial Research Units”. In F. M. Andrews, ed.: Scientific Productivity. The Effectiveness of Research Groups in Six Countries. Cambridge/Paris: Cambridge University Press/UNESCO.
Lehman, H. C. (1953): Age and Achievement. Princeton University Press.
Levin, S. G. and P. E. Stephan (1984): “Methodological Issues Encountered in Estimating the Relationship between Publishing and Age”. In W. Callebaut et al., eds.: George Sarton Centennial. Ghent: Communication & Cognition.
Mittermeir, R. and K. D. Knorr (1979): “Scientific Productivity and Accumulative Advantage: A Thesis Reassessed in the Light of International Data”. R & D Management. Vol. 9, 235–239.
OECD (1987): Universities under Scrutiny. Paris: OECD.
Over, R. (1982): “Does Research Productivity Decline with Age”? Higher Education. Vol. 11, 511–520.
Pelz, D. C. and F. M. Andrews (1966): Scientists in Organizations. Productive Climates for Research and Development. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Price, R. L., P. H. Thompson and G. W. Dalton (1975): “A Longitudinal Study of Technological Obsolescence”. Research Management. Vol. 18, 22–28.
Riley, M. W., M. Johnson and A. Foner (1972): Aging and Society - Volume Three: A Sociology of Age Stratification. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.
Rudd, E. (1977): “The Effect of Alphabetical Order of Author Listing on the Careers of Scientists”. Social Studies of Science. Vol. 7, 268–69.
Schaie, K. W. (1975): “Age Changes in Adult Intelligence”. In D. S. Woodruff and J. E. Birren, eds.: Aging. Scientific Perspectives and Social Issues. New York: D. Van Nostrand Company.
Stephan, P. E. and S. G. Levin (1987): Demographic and Economic Determinants of Scientific Productivity. Unpublished report. Georgia State University/University of Missouri-St. Louis.
Thagaard, T. (1986): Scientific Communities. Oslo: Department of Sociology, University of Oslo.
Tuckman, H. P. and J. Leahey (1975): “What Is an Article Worth?” Journal of Political Economy. Vol. 83, 951–67.
Van Heeringen, A. and P. A. Dijkwel (1987): “The Relationships between Age, Mobility and Scientific Productivity. Part II”. Scientometrics. Vol. 11, 281–293.
Zuckerman, H. (1968): “Patterns of Name Ordering among Authors of Scientific Papers: A Study of Social Symbolism and Its Ambiguity”. American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 74, 276–91.
Zuckerman, H. and R. K. Merton (1971): “Patterns of Evaluation in Science: Institutionalisation, Structure and Functions of the Referee System”. Minerva. Vol. 9, 66–100.
Zuckerman, H. and R. K. Merton (1972): “Age, Aging and Age Structure in Science”. In M. W. Riley, M. Johnson and A. Foner, eds.: Aging and Society - Volume Three: A Sociology of Age Stratification. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kyvik, S. Age and scientific productivity. Differences between fields of learning. High Educ 19, 37–55 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00142022
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00142022