
Early Research Grants Fuel Long-Term Success, Reinforcing the Matthew Effect in Science
A groundbreaking study analyzing over 100,000 research grant applications has confirmed what many in academic research have long suspected: early-career funding success plays a major role in shaping a researcher’s long-term trajectory. The data supports the well-known Matthew effect in science, suggesting that those who receive grants for student research or undergraduate research grants early on are more likely to secure continued funding in the future.
This trend raises concerns about equity in scientific research, where early winners gain momentum while equally capable peers may fall behind.
The Matthew Effect and Research Inequality
The study, published as a working paper on Figshare, aligns with the Matthew effect, a sociological theory suggesting that “the rich get richer”—in this context, researchers who earn research grants early continue to attract support, recognition, and opportunity. According to sociologist Thijs Bol from the University of Amsterdam, “This research helps explain how cumulative advantage plays out in real-world funding systems.”
Conducted by Vincent Traag, a computational social scientist at Leiden University, the research examined 14 grant programs across Canada, Austria, Luxembourg, and the UK. Among the key findings:
- 26% of senior researchers with later-stage funding had also received early-career research grants.
- Only 15% of those who missed early funding managed to secure senior-level support later.
Interestingly, the results suggest that the imbalance isn’t due to reviewer bias, but rather a self-selection process: researchers who receive early support are more likely to stay active and reapply, while others may exit academic research altogether.
“Promising scientists who miss early opportunities may leave the field, and that’s a major loss for scientific research and innovation,” says economist Donna Ginther (University of Kansas).
The Setback Effect: A Nuanced Counterpoint
The study also revisits the setback effect, where researchers who narrowly miss early grants outperform early winners in terms of citation impact. While this pattern was observed in select groups, it wasn’t consistent across all funding agencies or the broader applicant pool, pointing to a possible selection bias. The setback effect highlights the resilience of some early-career researchers but doesn’t cancel out the broader impact of early access to research grants.
To promote fairness in grants for student research and professional proposals, the authors suggest several reforms:
- Give detailed feedback to strong but unsuccessful applicants.
- Offer fast-track resubmission options for rejected proposals with high potential.
- Provide targeted undergraduate research grants and support for first-time applicants.
Some organizations are already adapting. For example, Canada’s CIHR has introduced “bridge grants” and priority notices, softening the Matthew effect in their national research ecosystem.
Leave a Reply