We sociologists love the Matthew effect. An great new article on this topic was just published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences by my advisor Arnout van de Rijt and several co-authors, including me. We demonstrate how initial, arbitrary advantages can lead to higher rates of subsequent success.

There’s also a very nice write up of the article in Quartz.

If you are interested, here’s the abstract. But why not read the entire paper itself — it’s open access!

Seemingly similar individuals often experience drastically different success trajectories, with some repeatedly failing and others consistently succeeding. One explanation is preexisting variability along unobserved fitness dimensions that is revealed gradually through differential achievement. Alternatively, positive feedback operating on arbitrary initial advantages may increasingly set apart winners from losers, producing runaway inequality. To identify social feedback in human reward systems, we conducted randomized experiments by intervening in live social environments across the domains of funding, status, endorsement, and reputation. In each system we consistently found that early success bestowed upon arbitrarily selected recipients produced significant improvements in subsequent rates of success compared with the control group of nonrecipients. However, success exhibited decreasing marginal returns, with larger initial advantages failing to produce much further differentiation. These findings suggest a lesser degree of vulnerability of reward systems to incidental or fabricated advantages and a more modest role for cumulative advantage in the explanation of social inequality than previously thought.

Seems that Stony Brook University’s press relations office is interested in the PLoS ONE article Arnout and I wrote. Had my picture taken and everything!

SBU Study Finds Informal Awards Contribute to Higher Wikipedia Participation

Researchers find that small tokens of appreciation stimulate and sustain Wikipedia’s vast online encyclopedia

STONY BROOK, NY, March 29, 2012 – When Stony Brook University Sociology Professor Arnout van de Rijt and graduate student Michael Restivo decided to find out what makes Wikipedia work, they knew they faced quite a challenge. After all, neither monetary compensation nor formal work relations explain the success of this all-volunteer online encyclopedia. The team reasoned that expressions of appreciation by other Wikipedia contributors, including awards, helped to fuel what they called a “spirit of generosity.”

The team was surprised by the extent to which those rewards sustain the ongoing Internet phenomenon that is Wikipedia. Their paper, Experimental Study of Informal Rewards in Peer Production, has been published in the March 29, 2012 edition of PLoS ONE, an international, peer-reviewed, open-access, online publication.