The longitudinal relationship between quality and quantity of productive output is examined over the careers of ten recipients of the Distinguished Scientific Contributions Award. Four alternative models of this relationship-expertise-acquisition, youthful-enthusiasm, peak-age, and constant-probability-of-success-yield distinctive predictions regarding 1) how the ratio of major contributions to total output changes as a career advances and 2) the developmental association between major and minor works over consecutive time periods. The quality of a publication was assessed by the citations it earned in the professional literature. The results endorsed the constant-probability-of-success model (both across and within careers). Not only does confirmation of this model provide support for Campbell's blind-variation-and-selective-retention theory of creative thought, but it additionally has important implications for understanding the role of age and chance in the careers of successful psychologists.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BeardG. M., Legal Responsibility in Old Age, Russell, New York, 1874.
2.
LehmanH. C., Age and Achievement, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1953.
3.
LyonsJ., Chronological Age, Professional Age, and Eminence in Psychology, American Psychologist, 23, pp. 371–374, 1968.
4.
ZusneL., Age and Achievement in Psychology: The Harmonic Mean as a Model, American Psychologist, 31, pp. 805–807, 1976.
5.
LehmanH. G., The Psychologist's Most Creative Years, American Psychologist, 21, pp. 363–369, 1966.
6.
DennisW., The Age Decrement in Outstanding Scientific Contributions: Fact or Artifact?American Psychologist, 13, pp. 457–460, 1958.
7.
DennisW., Creative Productivity between the Ages of 20 and 80 Years. Journal of Gerontology, 21, pp. 1–8, 1966.
8.
ColeS., Age and Scientific Performance, American Journal of Sociology, 84, pp. 958–977, 1979.
9.
ZuckermanH. and MertonR. K., Age, Aging, and Age Structure in Science, in Aging and Society (Vol. 3), RileyM. W.JohnsonM., and FonerA. (eds.), Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1972.
10.
SimontonD. K., Creative Productivity, Age, and Stress: A Biographical Time-Series Analysis of 10 Classical Composers, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, pp. 791–804, 1977.
11.
SimontonD. K., Thematic Fame, Melodic Originality, and Musical Zeitgeist; A Biographical and Transhistorical Content Analysis, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, pp. 972–983, 1980.
12.
SimontonD. K., Age and Literary Creativity: A Cross-Cultural and Transhistorical Survey, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 6, pp. 259–277, 1975.
13.
SimontonD. K., Creative Productivity and Age: A Mathematical Model Based on a Two-Step Cognitive Process. Developmental Review, 4, pp. 77–111, 1984.
14.
BayerA. E. and DuttonJ. E., Career Age and Research — Professional Activities of Academic Scientists: Tests of Alternative Nonlinear Models and Some Implications for Higher Education Faculty Policies, Journal of Higher Education, 48, pp. 259–282, 1977.
15.
MertonR. K., The Matthew Effect in Science, Science, 159, pp. 56–63, 1968.
16.
AllisonP. D. and StewartJ. A., Productivity Differences Among Scientists: Evidence for Accumulative Advantage, American Sociological Review, 39, pp. 596–606, 1974.
17.
ZuckermanH., Scientific Elite, Free Press, New York, 1977.
18.
CampbellD. T., Blind Variation and Selective Retention in Creative Thought as in Other Knowledge Processes, Psychological Review, 67, pp. 380–400, 1960.
19.
DennisW., Productivity Among American Psychologist, American Psychologist, 9, pp. 191–194, 1954.
20.
HelmreichR. L., J. T. Spence, W. E. Beane, G. W. Lucker and K. A. Matthews, Making it in Academic Psychology: Demographic and Personality Correlates of Attainment, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, pp. 896–908, 1980.
21.
SimontonD. K., The Library Laboratory: Archival Data in Personality and Social Psychology, in Review of Personality and Social Psychology (Vol. 2.), WheelerL. (ed.), Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, Calif., 1981.
WatsonR. I., (ed.), Eminent Contributors to Psychology (Vol. 1), Springer, New York, 1975.
24.
EndlerN. S.RushtonJ. P. and RoedigerH. L., III, Productivity and Scholarly Impact (Citations) of British, Canadian, and U.S. Departments of Psychology, American Psychologist, 33, pp. 1064–1082, 1978.
25.
EndlerN. S.RushtonJ. P. and RoedigerH. L., Cross-Sectional Time-Series Experiments: Some Suggested Statistical Analyses, Psychological Bulletin, 84, pp. 489–502, 1977.
26.
SimontonD. K., Genius, Creativity, and Leadership, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1984.
27.
AshtonS. V. and OppenheimC., A Method of Predicting Nobel Prizewinners in Chemistry, Social Studies of Science, 8, pp. 341–348, 1978.
28.
ColeS. and ColeJ. R., Measuring the Quality of Sociological Research: Problems in the Use of the Science Citation Index, American Sociologist, 6, pp. 23–29, 1971.
29.
MyersC. R., Journal Citations and Scientific Eminence in Contemporary Psychology, American Psychologist, 25, pp. 1041–1048, 1970.
30.
LindseyD., Production and Citation Measures in the Sociology of Science: The Problem of Multiple Authorship, Social Studies of Science, 10, pp. 145–162, 1980.
31.
MacRaeD., Growth and Decay Curves in Scientific Citations, American Sociological Review, 34, pp. 631–635, 1969.
32.
PriceD. S., Networks of Scientific Papers, Science, 149, pp. 510–515, 1965.
33.
CohenJ. and CohenP., Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis in the Behavioral Sciences, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N. J., 1975.
34.
InhaberH. and PrzednowekK., Quality of Research and the Nobel Prizes, Social Studies of Science, 6, pp. 33–50, 1976.
35.
SimontonD. K., Techno-Scientific Activity and War: A Yearly Time-Series Analysis, 1500–1903 A. D., Scientometrics, 2, pp. 251–255, 1980.
36.
ColeS.ColeJ. R. and SimonG. A., Chance and Consensus in Peer Review, Science, 214, pp. 881–886, 1981.
