The Matthew Effect in science.

TLDR: Based on interviews with Nobel laureates, Merton^ observes that eminent scientists get disproportionately great credit for their contributions to science, while relatively unknown scientists tend to get disproportionately little credit for comparable contributions.

Abstract: Based on interviews with Nobel laureates, Merton^ observes that eminent scientists get disproportionately great credit for their contributions to science, while relatively unknown scientists tend to get disproportionately little credit for comparable contributions. Merton also proposes and supports the related hypothesis that a scientific contribution will have a greater visibility in the community of scientists when it is introduced by a scientist of high rank than when it is introduced by one who has not yet made his mark. This raises interesting implications as to the beneficial effect of having an established scientist put his or her name on a paper to get better visibility for junior coworkers. One side effect of the acclamation and acceptance given to proven and great scientists is the fact that centers of demonstrated scientific excellence are allocated far larger resources for research than centers that have yet to make their mark.