Abstract
An implicit assumption prevailing in the science community is that scientists with postdoctoral training demonstrate a higher rate of productivity than their peers without such experience (Folger et al. in Human resources and higher education. Russell Sage, New York, 1970; NRC in Postdoctoral training in the biomedical sciences. National Academy of Science, Washington DC, 1974; NRC in Research training and career patterns of bioscientists: The training programs of the National Institutes of Health. National Academy of Science, Washington DC, 1976; Reskin in Am Sociol Rev 41(4):597–612, 1976), and especially so if postdocs are employed in research intensive settings (McGinnis et al. in Soc Force 60(3):701–722, 1982; Zumeta in Extending the educational ladder: The changing roles of postdoctoral education in the United States. National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va, 1985). In contrast, by exploring the reward structure of the science system, sociologists contend that departments where scientists obtain positions play a substantial role in shaping their research productivity (Long in Am Sociol Rev 43(6):889–908, 1978; Long and McGinnis in Am Sociol Rev, 46(4):422–442, 1981; Allison and Long in Am Sociol Rev, 55(4):469–478, 1990). This study investigates both theories in an attempt to unfold how these factors impact scientists’ research productivity over time. Using curriculum vitae (CV) from a nationally representative sample of academic scientists and engineers, the findings suggest that postdoc training indeed boosts individual research productivity during scientists’ early career periods (the first 3 years after the doctoral degrees), however, the effect fades quickly. While departmental prestige plays a role in scientists’ research productivity, further investigation indicates that only scientists placed in highly prestigious departments demonstrate a consistently higher productivity level than their peers in other departments. Given that postdoc training contributes significantly to the higher likelihood of being placed in highly prestigious departments, postdoctoral training and the subsequent placement in highly prestigious departments together are conducive to the presence of the accumulative advantage effect.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The research extensive universities award at least 50 doctoral degrees each year. In this sample, we excluded Teachers' College of Columbia Universities since it did not award doctorates in science or engineering fields in 2000. The university list is revealed by Carnegie Classification (2000). The list of S&E fields is defined by National Science Foundation (2000). We excluded health science and economics to develop 13 sampling disciplines. In cases where disciplines had fewer female faculty members than 200, the census of women in disciplines was conducted. Here were the fields with less than 200 female faculty members: chemical engineering, civil engineering, material engineering and mechanical engineering.
Multiple techniques were employed to maximize the response rate of the survey project. After three waves, 38% response rate was achieved, which allowed a comparative analysis between respondents and those who did not respond the survey. No significant differences were detected by t-tests and wave analyses. The representation issue of surveyed scientists and engineers was also well addressed by Bozeman and Gaughan (2007).
There are scientists who received their doctoral training outside of the United States and obtained an academic position in research extensive universities. Given that the number of these scientists is quite small and their productivity pattern is seemingly different, this study excludes them.
References
Allison, P. D. (1980). Inequality and scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science, 10(2), 163–179.
Allison, P. D., & Long, J. S. (1990). Departmental effects on scientific productivity. American Sociological Review, 55(4), 469–478.
Allison, P. D., & Stewart, J. A. (1974). Productivity differences among scientists: Evidence for accumulative advantage. American Sociological Review, 39(4), 596–606.
Association of American Universities (AAU). (1998). Committee on postdoctoral education: Report and recommendations, March 31, 1998. http://www.aau.edu/reports/Postdocrpt.html.
Association of American Universities (AAU). (2005). Postdoc education survey: Summary of results. Oct 2005. Graduate and Postdoc Committee: http://www.aau.edu/WorkArea/showcontent.aspx?id=1944&LangType=1033.
Bozeman, B., & Gaughan, M. (2007). Impacts of grants and contracts on academic researchers’ interactions with industry. Research Policy, 36(5), 694–707.
Clemente, F. (1973). Early career determinants of research productivity. The American Journal of Sociology, 79(2), 409–419.
Coggeshall, P. E., Norvell, J. C., et al. (1978). Changing postdoctoral career patterns for biomedical scientists. Science, 202(4367), 487–493.
Cole, J. R., & Cole, S. (1973). Social stratification in science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Corley, E., Bozeman, B., & Gaughan, M. (2003). Evaluating the impacts of grants on women scientists’ careers: The curriculum vitae as a tool for research assessment. In P. Shapira & S. Kuhlman (Eds.), Learning from science and technology policy evaluation: Experiences from the United States and Europe (pp. 293–315). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Davis, G. (2006). Improving the postdoctoral experience: An empirical approach. Sigma Xi Postdoctoral Survey: http://postdoc.sigmaxi.org/results/surveyanalysis20060201.pdf/file_view.
Dietz, J. S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). Academic careers, patents, and productivity: Industry experience as scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy, 34(3), 349–367.
Dietz, J. S., Chompalov, I., Bozeman, B., et al. (2000). Using the curriculum vita to study the career paths of scientists and engineers: An exploratory assessment. Scientometrics, 49(3), 419–442.
Diprete, T. A., & Eirich, G. M. (2007). Cumulative advantage as a mechanism for inequity: A review of theoretical and empirical developments. Annual Review of Sociology, 32, 271–297.
Folger, J. K., Astin, H. S., & Bayer, A. E. (1970). Human resources and higher education. New York: Russell Sage.
Gaughan, M., & Ponomariov, B. (2008). Faculty publication productivity, collaboration, and grants velocity: Using curricula vitae to compare center-affiliated and unaffiliated scientists. Research Evaluation, 17(2), 103–110.
Jones, L. V., Lindzey, G., & Coggeshall, P. E. (Eds.). (1982a). An assessment of research-doctorate programs in the United States: Biological sciences. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Jones, L. V., Lindzey, G., & Coggeshall, P. E. (Eds.). (1982b). An assessment of research-doctorate programs in the United States: Engineering. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Jones, L. V., Lindzey, G., & Coggeshall, P. E. (Eds.). (1982c). An assessment of research-doctorate programs in the United States: Mathematical and physical sciences. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Lin, M. W., & Bozeman, B. (2006). Researchers’ industry experience and productivity in university—industry research centers: A “scientific and technical human capital” explanation. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(2), 269–290.
Long, J. S. (1978). Productivity and academic position in the scientific career. American Sociological Review, 43(6), 889–908.
Long, J. S., Allison, P. D., & McGinnis, R. (1979). Entrance into the academic career. American Sociological Review, 44(5), 816–830.
Long, J. S., Allison, P. D., & McGinnis, R. (1993). Rank advancement in academic careers: Sex differences and the effects of productivity. American Sociologial Review, 58(5), 703–722.
Long, J. S., & Freese, J. (2006). Regression models for categorical dependent variables using STATA (2nd). StataCorp LP.
Long, J. S., & McGinnis, R. (1981). Organizational context and scientific productivity. American Sociological Review, 46(4), 422–442.
McGinnis, R., Allison, P. D., & Long, J. S. (1982). Postdoctoral training in bioscience: Allocation and outcomes. Social Forces, 60(3), 701–722.
Merton, R. K. (1973). The sociology of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
National Research Council. (1969). The invisible university: Postdoctoral education in the United States. Washington, DC: National Academy of Science.
National Research Council. (1974). Postdoctoral training in the biomedical sciences. Washington, DC: National Academy of Science.
National Research Council. (1976). Research training and career patterns of bioscientists: The training programs of the National Institutes of Health. Washington, DC: National Academy of Science.
National Research Council. (1981). Postdoc appointments and disappointments. Washington, DC: National Academy of Science.
National Research Council. (1995). Research doctorate programs in the United States: Continuity and change. Washington, DC: National Academy of Science.
National Research Council. (1998). Trends in the early careers of life scientists. Washington, DC: National Academy of Science.
National Research Council. (2005). Bridges to independence: Fostering the independence of new investigators in biomedical research. Board on life sciences. Washington, DC: National Academy of Science.
National Science Board. (2006). Science and engineering indicators. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
National Science Board. (2008). Science and engineering indicators. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
Perrucci, R., O’flaherty, K., & Marshall, H. (1983). Market conditions, productivity, and promotion among university faculty. Research in Higher Education, 19(4), 431–449.
Reskin, B. F. (1976). Sex-differences in status attainment in science-case of postdoctoral fellowship. American Sociological Review, 41(4), 597–612.
Roose, K., & Anderson, C. (1970). An assessment of quality in graduate education. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
Su, X. H. (2009). The Impacts of Postdoctoral Training on Scientists’ Academic Employment. Working paper. Available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1438146
Xie, Y., & Shauman, K. A. (1998). Sex differences in research productivity: New evidence about an old puzzle. American Sociological Review, 63(6), 847–870.
Zumeta, W. (1984). Anatomy of the boom in postdoctoral appointments during the 1970s: Troubling implications for quality science. Science Technology & Human Values(47), 23–37.
Zumeta, W. (1985). Extending the educational ladder: The changing roles of postdoctoral education in the United States. Springfield, Va.: National Technical Information Service.
Acknowledgments
The data on which this research is based was supported by National Science Foundation CAREER grant REC 0447878/0710836, “University Determinants of Women’s Academic Career Success” (Monica Gaughan, Principal Investigator) and NSF grant SBR 9818229, “Assessing R and D Projects’ Impacts on Scientific and Technical Human Capital Development” (Barry Bozeman, Principal Investigator). The views reported here do not necessarily reflect those of the National Science Foundation. The author is grateful to Barry Bozeman and Monica Gaughan for their generous support.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Su, X. Postdoctoral training, departmental prestige and scientists’ research productivity. J Technol Transf 36, 275–291 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-009-9133-3
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-009-9133-3