We examine how the presence of connections in scientific committees affects researchers' decision to apply and their chances of success. We exploit evidence from Italian academia, where in order to be promoted to an associate or full professorship, researchers are firstly required to qualify in a national evaluation process. Prospective candidates are significantly less likely to apply when the committee includes, through luck of the draw, a colleague or a co-author. This pattern is driven mainly by researchers with a weak research profile. At the same time, information from 300,000 individual evaluation reports shows that applicants tend to receive more favorable evaluations from connected evaluators. Overall, this evidence is consistent w...
First published online: 07 January 2019This article investigates the role of the gender composition ...
The effect of social capital is often overrated because contacts and centrality can be a consequence...
Contains fulltext : 131522.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)Career grants...
We examine how the presence of connections in scientific committees affects researchers' decision to...
We investigate theoretically and empirically how connections in evaluation committees affect applica...
The selection of evaluators is subject to a well-known dilemma. Evaluators who are acquainted with c...
This paper analyzes how evaluators' private information and subjective biases affect evaluations in ...
This paper analyzes the role of connections in academic promotions. We exploit evidence from central...
We present projection sorting, an algorithmic approach to determining pairwise short-range forces be...
We study a reform which occurred in Italy in 2008 in the formation of selection committees for quali...
Bias in grant allocation is a critical issue, as the expectation is that grants are given to the bes...
This article investigates the role of the gender composition of selection committees and connections...
Does peer review fulfill its declared objective of identifying the best science and the best scienti...
Career grants are an important instrument for selecting and stimulating the next generation of leadi...
Contains fulltext : 183412pub.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)This article...
First published online: 07 January 2019This article investigates the role of the gender composition ...
The effect of social capital is often overrated because contacts and centrality can be a consequence...
Contains fulltext : 131522.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)Career grants...
We examine how the presence of connections in scientific committees affects researchers' decision to...
We investigate theoretically and empirically how connections in evaluation committees affect applica...
The selection of evaluators is subject to a well-known dilemma. Evaluators who are acquainted with c...
This paper analyzes how evaluators' private information and subjective biases affect evaluations in ...
This paper analyzes the role of connections in academic promotions. We exploit evidence from central...
We present projection sorting, an algorithmic approach to determining pairwise short-range forces be...
We study a reform which occurred in Italy in 2008 in the formation of selection committees for quali...
Bias in grant allocation is a critical issue, as the expectation is that grants are given to the bes...
This article investigates the role of the gender composition of selection committees and connections...
Does peer review fulfill its declared objective of identifying the best science and the best scienti...
Career grants are an important instrument for selecting and stimulating the next generation of leadi...
Contains fulltext : 183412pub.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)This article...
First published online: 07 January 2019This article investigates the role of the gender composition ...
The effect of social capital is often overrated because contacts and centrality can be a consequence...
Contains fulltext : 131522.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)Career grants...