The Development of Scientific Talent in Westinghouse Finalists and Members of the National Academy of Sciences

This paper reports the results of two studies on the development of scientific talent among the scientific elite: finalists in the Westinghouse Science Competition and members of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). Sampling four cohorts of finalists, we examined whether these gifted teenagers actually do go on to be the best scientists of the next generation by coding education and career outcomes. Finalists were quite successful and stayed mostly within science and medicine for their career choice. A rather high—although marginally unequal—portion of male (91%) and female (74%) finalists earned a doctoral degree. Women were also more likely to change to non-scientific professions than men. Among the most compelling findings from the NAS study were: age that scientific talent was recognized by self and others was an important predictor of early publication, which in turn was an important predictor of lifetime productivity. Growth curve analyses suggested a cubic model best fit productivity data over time. Moreover, in both samples there was an association between scientific achievement and recent immigrant status. Various theoretical models are discussed as possible explanations for the developmental, gender, and immigrant-status findings on scientific talent.

[1]  Alan E. Bayer,et al.  Career Age and Research-Professional Activities of Academic Scientists. Tests of Alternative Nonlinear Models and Some Implications for Higher Education Faculty Policies. , 1977 .

[2]  L. Terman.  Mental and physical traits of a thousand gifted children , 1926 .

[3]  R. Over.  Is age a good predictor of research productivity , 1982 .

[4]  R. Merton,et al.  The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations , 1975, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion.

[5]  Stephen Cole,et al.  Age and Scientific Performance , 1979, American Journal of Sociology.

[6]  Gregory J. Feist.  Quantity, Quality, and Depth of Research as Influences on Scientific Eminence: Is Quantity Most Important? , 1997 .

[7]  D. Lubinski,et al.  Mathematically facile adolescents with math-science aspirations: New perspectives on their educational and vocational development. , 2002 .

[8]  F. Barron,et al.  Predicting creativity from early to late adulthood: Intellect, potential, and personality , 2003 .

[9]  C. Freeman,et al.  The Crystallizing Experience: A Study in Musical Precocity , 1999 .

[10]  Dale J. Prediger.  Dimensions Underlying Holland's Hexagon: Missing Link between Interests and Occupations?. , 1982 .

[11]  L. Terman,et al.  Are Scientists Different , 1955 .

[12]  Camilla Persson Benbow,et al.  Consequences in High School and College of Sex Differences in Mathematical Reasoning Ability: A Longitudinal Perspective , 1982 .

[13]  J. S. Long,et al.  From Scarcity to Visibility: Gender Differences in the Careers of Doctoral Scientists and Engineers. , 2001 .

[14]  J. F. Duff.  Genetic studies of genius. Vol. I. Mental and physical traits of a thousand gifted children , 1926 .

[15]  D. Lubinski,et al.  The study of mathematically precocious youth: The first three decades of a planned 50-year study of intellectual talent. , 1994 .

[16]  E. Seymour,et al.  Talking About Leaving: Why Undergraduates Leave The Sciences , 1997 .

[17]  R. Lippa.  Gender-related individual differences and the structure of vocational interests: the importance of the people-things dimension. , 1998, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[18]  R. Duschl,et al.  Retention and attrition of science talent: a longitudinal study of Westinghouse Science Talent Search winners , 1993 .

[19]  James L. Wardrop,et al.  Antecedent Factors Differentiating Women and Men in Science/Nonscience Careers , 1999 .

[20]  H. Zuckerman,et al.  Marriage, motherhood and research performance in science. , 1987, Scientific American.

[21]  S. Cole.  Women in science. , 1994, Science.

[22]  J. Berger.  The Young Scientists: America's Future and the Winning of the Westinghouse, Joseph Berger. 1994. Addison-Wesley, New York, NY. 256 pages. ISBN: 0-201-63255-1. $21.95 , 1996 .

[23]  A. Diamond,et al.  The life-cycle research productivity of mathematicians and scientists. , 1986, Journal of gerontology.

[24]  S. Baron-Cohen,et al.  The Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ): Evidence from Asperger Syndrome/High-Functioning Autism, Malesand Females, Scientists and Mathematicians , 2001, Journal of autism and developmental disorders.

[25]  Stephen Cole,et al.  Social Stratification in Science. , 1973 .

[26]  R Over,et al.  Age and scholarly impact. , 1989, Psychology and aging.

[27]  M. Martinez-pons,et al.  Mathematics Self-Efficacy, Ethnic Identity, Gender, and Career Interests Related to Mathematics and Science , 1999 .

[28]  H. Lehman,et al.  Age and Achievement , 1953 .

[29]  B. Reskin.  Scientific Productivity and the Reward Structure of Science , 1977 .

[30]  S. Baron-Cohen,et al.  A mathematician, a physicist and a computer scientist with Asperger syndrome: Performance on folk psychology and folk physics tests , 1999 .

[31]  J. Singer,et al.  Applied Longitudinal Data Analysis , 2003 .

[32]  Gregory J. Feist,et al.  The Psychology of Science : Review and Integration of a Nascent Discipline , 1998 .

[33]  D. Simonton.  Career landmarks in science: Individual differences and interdisciplinary contrasts. , 1991 .

[34]  I. Mullis.  TIMSS 1999 international mathematics report : Findings from IEA's repeat of the third international mathematics and science study at the eighth grade , 2000 .

[35]  J. P. Rushton,et al.  Relation between aging and research productivity of academic psychologists. , 1986, Psychology and aging.

[36]  A. Roe,et al.  Changes in scientific activities with age. , 1965, Science.

[37]  David Lubinski,et al.  Sex Differences in Mathematical Reasoning Ability at Age 13: Their Status 20 Years Later , 2000, Psychological science.

[38]  W. Dennis,et al.  Age and productivity among scientists. , 1956, Science.

[39]  C. Benbow,et al.  Mathematically Talented Males and Females and Achievement in the High School Sciences , 1986 .

[40]  Sunghee Park,et al.  Gender Differences in High-Achieving Students in Math and Science , 2001 .

[41]  Gregory J. Feist.  A Structural Model of Scientific Eminence , 1993 .

[42]  R. Subotnik,et al.  Beyond Terman: Contemporary Longitudinal Studies of Giftedness and Talent , 1994 .

[43]  R. Crutchfield,et al.  Mathematicians: the creative researcher and the average PhD. , 1970, Journal of consulting and clinical psychology.

[44]  C. J. Mills,et al.  The Social Context and Developmental Patterns of Crystallizing Experiences among Academically Talented Youth. , 1995 .

[45]  H. Lehman,et al.  The age decrement in outstanding scientific creativity. , 1960 .

[46]  H. Lehman,et al.  The psychologist's most creative years. , 1966, The American psychologist.

[47]  W. Dearborn.  Genetic Studies of Genius , 1926 .

[48]  L. Cronbach,et al.  The Gifted Group in Later Maturity , 1995 .

[49]  L. Hedges,et al.  Sex differences in mental test scores, variability, and numbers of high-scoring individuals. , 1995, Science.

[50]  W. Dennis,et al.  Creative productivity between the ages of 20 and 80 years. , 1966, Journal of gerontology.

[51]  S. Baron-Cohen.  Does Autism Occur More Often in Families of Physicists, Engineers, and Mathematicians? , 1998 .

[52]  Dean Keith Simonton,et al.  Scientific Genius: A Psychology of Science , 1988 .

[53]  D. Simonton,et al.  Age and outstanding achievement: what do we know after a century of research? , 1988, Psychological bulletin.