The paradox of the Matthew effect in science and its sociological solution

Abstract

The article reveals the paradox of the Matthew effect in science, which was discovered by R. Merton and his colleagues in the result of their research in the 1960s. The author argues that the Matthew effect is an expression of inequality in the academic community, which has a regular nature. The article notes that studies reveal signs of inequality both at the national and international levels of academic communities. This pattern contradicts the fundamental principles of the scientific ethos of collectivism, universalism, selflessness and organised skepticism. That determines the theoretical relevance of the problem. The article also defines the practical reasons for the relevance of this problem, the causes of which lie in the increasing pressure on scientific and educational systems in the form of ratings of individual employees and organisations, scientific publications and entire countries. The article discusses the general criteria of established approaches to the conceptualisation of inequality in society. It is argued that the dominant model in the conceptualisation of social inequality is the class model, the specifics of which are determined within the framework of particular approaches. The author highlights the key aspects of scientific activity, which are expressed in its symbolic and collective nature, as well as in the economic conditionality of the process of scientific knowledge production. It author argues that the specifics of scientific activity require the definition of special approaches and theories in the study of inequality in science and the justification of the Matthew effect in this area. The article presents an attempt to substantiate heuristic value and relevance of Bourdieu’s theory for solving the theoretical problem of inequality in science. It highlights the key provisions of Bourdieu’s theory of the field of science, which integrates both the interaction of individual aspects of scientific activity and various levels of social relations in the scientific environment due to the operation of concepts of various forms of capital. The author argues that his theory gives a possibility to define the basic mechanisms of inequality production in science, but requires recourses of other theories from the field of sociology of scientific knowledge.