基础研究资源配置“马太效应”评估——基于倾向得分匹配法的实证分析

Evaluation of the

摘要:

“马太效应”是科学界普遍存在的现象，但是少有研究评估“马太效应”的纯效应，团队与组织的累积优势被理所当然地当做“马太效应”。本文通过倾向得分匹配法，消除样本之间的系统差异，剔除团队与组织的累积优势，研究“马太效应”在自然科学基金评审结果影响的纯效应。研究发现：“马太效应”确实会对研究者申请自然科学基金结果产生一定影响，而团队与组织的累积优势，会通过影响“马太效应”，间接影响自然科学基金申请结果。具体而言，具有高级职称的研究者比没有高级职称的研究者立项成功的可能性高11.1%，发表过SCI论文比没有发表过SCI论文的研究者项目立项的可能性高7.6%。而能否获得高级职称以及是否发表过SCI论文，除跟研究者个人性别、年龄、学历存在关联外，所在团队与组织也发挥着显著作用。

Abstract:

The "Matthew Effect" is a common phenomenon in the scientific community, but few studies have evaluated the pure effect of the individual "Matthew Effect". The cumulative advantages of teams and organizations are taken for granted as the "Matthew Effect". The propensity score matching method is used to eliminate the systematic differences between samples, eliminate the accumulated advantages of teams and organizations, and study the pure effect of the "Matthew Effect" on the evaluation results of the Natural Science Foundation. The study found that the "Matthew Effect" have a certain impact on the results of the researcher's application for the Natural Science Foundation, and the cumulative advantages of the team and organization will indirectly affect the results of the Natural Science Fund application through the "Matthew Effect". Specifically, researchers with a senior professional title are 11.1% more likely than those without a senior professional title to successfully establish a project. Researchers who have published SCI core papers are 7.6% more likely than those who have not published SCI core papers. In addition to being related to the researcher’s gender, age, and academic qualifications, whether he can obtain a senior professional title and whether he has published SCI core papers, his team and organization also play a significant role.