Is Science Rigged for the Rich?

A recent paper published by the Centre for Economic Policy Research, titled “Access to Opportunity in the Sciences: Evidence From the Nobel Laureates,” found that 67 percent of science Nobel Prize winners have “fathers from above the 90th income percentile in their birth country.” The authors, affiliated with Imperial College London, Dartmouth College, Princeton University, and the University of Pennsylvania, claim that their paper reveals extreme inequality in the science world and suggests that undiscovered geniuses from poor backgrounds never had the chance to show what they could do for humanity.

The study received considerable press attention, including a piece in The Guardian claiming that it showed “a lot of talent wasted…and breakthroughs lost.”

“The Nobel prizes highlight that we have a biased system in science and little is being done to even out the playing field,” wrote scientist Kate Shaw in Physics World. “We should not accept that such a tiny demographic are born ‘better’ at science than anyone else.” 

This study contains several statistical and conceptual errors, making its findings meaningless. It provides no evidence that unequal opportunity in science limits human progress. 

For starters, how did the authors determine who was “born better” and thus had a better chance of winning a Nobel Prize? The study examined what their fathers did for a living. It found that since 1901, people with scientists for fathers had 150 times the chance of winning a science Nobel than the average person. 

Scientists earn more on average, which allegedly shows that coming from a wealthier family gave them a boost. But it’s common sense that the children of scientists will have an advantage in winning Nobel Prizes. Children of successful people often excel in the same fields as their parents. The size of the advantage may seem surprising, but this is typical when you look at the extremes of the bell curve. Even small initial advantages can result in extreme differences in outcome.

Suppose instead of Nobel Prizes in science we were talking about an Olympic gold medal for the 100-meter dash. Suppose everyone in the world got to participate. There would be thousands of people a step or two behind the winner.

Now, suppose that 10 percent of the population—say, anyone with a left-handed mother—had started the race with a two-step head start. The average runner with a left-handed mother would only be two steps ahead of the pack, but we can almost guarantee that the winner would be one of them.

But the authors don’t treat winning a Nobel Prize like a race, they suggest it’s like winning a coin-flipping contest in which innate talent, culture, and hard work don’t matter.

“If talent and opportunity were equally distributed,” they write, “the average winner’s parent would be at the 50th percentile.”

Let’s say everyone in the world participates in a coin-flipping contest to get 24 heads in a row, which is similar to winning a Nobel Prize. The one percent with scientist fathers gets two free heads, giving them a modest 8 percent advantage and 300 times the chance of winning the contest. 

The same mathematics applies to children of scientist fathers, who have 150 times the chance of winning a Nobel Prize. That could result from a modest eight percent advantage in scientific talent and opportunity. The bell curve strikes again.

So why would having a scientist father put someone 8 percentile points ahead of the pack? The study authors say it’s their families’ higher income or education, but those are not the first factors I would point to.

One key factor is genetics. Though we haven’t identified a Nobel Prize gene, some helpful qualities for scientific accomplishment—like IQ, lack of major congenital disabilities, conscientiousness, and curiosity—are partly influenced by DNA. Another

Read More

Article from Reason.com

Reason Magazine

The Reason Magazine website is a go-to destination for libertarians seeking cogent analysis, investigative reporting, and thought-provoking commentary. Championing the principles of individual freedom, limited government, and free markets, the site offers a diverse range of articles, videos, and podcasts that challenge conventional wisdom and advocate for libertarian solutions. Whether you’re interested in politics, culture, or technology, Reason provides a unique lens that prioritizes liberty and rational discourse. It’s an essential resource for those who value critical thinking and nuanced debate in the pursuit of a freer society.