REVIEW 1 cited by
Ranking mobility and impact inequality in early academic careers
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
How difficult is it for an early career academic to climb the ranks of their discipline? We tackle this question with a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of 57 disciplines, examining the publications of more than 5 million authors whose careers started between 1986 and 2008. We calibrate a simple random walk model over historical data of ranking mobility, which we use to (1) identify which strata of academic impact rankings are the most/least mobile and (2) study the temporal evolution of mobility. By focusing our analysis on cohorts of authors starting their careers in the same year, we find that ranking mobility is remarkably low for the top and bottom-ranked authors, and that this excess of stability persists throughout the entire period of our analysis. We further observe that mobility of impact rankings has increased over time, and that such rise has been accompanied by a decline of impact inequality, which is consistent with the negative correlation that we observe between such two quantities. These findings provide clarity on the opportunities of new scholars entering the academic community, with implications for academic policymaking.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Forecasting Faculty Placement from Patterns in Co-authorship Networks
Co-authorship network features improve out-of-sample prediction of whether a computer science PhD's first faculty position is at a top-10 department, beyond PhD rank and bibliometrics.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.