“Resting on Their Laureates? Research Productivity Among Winners of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine”, 2023-06 (; backlinks):
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine is the most prestigious and coveted award in medical research. Anecdotal evidence and related research suggest that receiving it may adversely affect research productivity.
We compared the post-Nobel research output of laureates (prize years: 1950–60201014ya) with their pre-Nobel output and with the output of a matched control group consisting of winners of the Lasker Award, another highly prestigious medical research prize.
Pre-Nobel, laureates’ publications were more voluminous, highly cited, and novel than those of (future) Lasker winners. Post-Nobel, laureates’ productivity decreased sharply, eventually falling below that of Lasker winners on all 3 measures.
These declines may reflect diversionary effects of the Prize, changed incentives, or intrinsically different career arcs for medical researchers who win the Nobel Prize.
…1977, studying 41 Nobel laureates, found short-term & long-term decreases in publication volume after winning the Prize; the reductions were particularly large among older scientists who had been less eminent before their win. 2015 studied winners of the Fields Medal, the most prestigious Prize in mathematics, and found post-medal decreases in their papers, citations, and mentoring activity, relative to “contenders” who did not win; medalists were also more likely to shift their research into areas outside those in which they had made their name. By contrast, et al 2013 studied winners of the John Bates Clark Medal, awarded by the American Economic Association to outstanding scholars under 40 years; they went on to have more and more highly-cited publications than a comparable group of high-performing economists who did not win the medal.
…There are 3 plausible explanations for our results. The first and the most compelling is that the Nobel Prize reduces productivity by drawing its recipients away from research. Producing innovative and influential research output demands considerable time, effort, and focus. The Nobel Prize in Medicine or Physiology provides a platform to serve as ambassadors for science. Laureates often step onto this platform, replacing time in the laboratory with time leading committees and institutions, serving on government and professional bodies, and writing books and delivering talks for general audiences. Zuckerman’s interviews with laureates found abundant evidence of such “diverting consequences”.