Close Menu
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    SciTechDaily
    • Biology
    • Chemistry
    • Earth
    • Health
    • Physics
    • Science
    • Space
    • Technology
    Facebook X (Twitter) Pinterest YouTube RSS
    SciTechDaily
    Home»Science»“What Doesn’t Kill You Makes You Stronger” Proven by Science
    Science

    “What Doesn’t Kill You Makes You Stronger” Proven by Science

    By Northwestern UniversityOctober 1, 2019No Comments4 Mins Read
    Facebook Twitter Pinterest Telegram LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Reddit
    Share
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Telegram Email Reddit

    Successful Man

    Researchers find that early-career failure promotes future professional success.

    Scientists at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management have established a causal relationship between failure and future success, proving German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche’s adage that “what does not kill me makes me stronger.”

    The researchers utilized advanced analytics to assess the relationship between professional failure and success for young scientists. They found, in contrast to their initial expectations, that failure early in one’s career leads to greater success in the long term for those who try again.

    “The attrition rate does increase for those who fail early in their careers,” lead author Yang Wang said. “But those who stick it out, on average, perform much better in the long term, suggesting that if it doesn’t kill you, it really does make you stronger.”

    The study, “Early-career setback and future career impact,” was published on October 1, 2019, in Nature Communications.

    The findings provide a counter-narrative to the Matthew Effect, which posits a “rich get richer” theory that success begets more success.

    “It turns out that, historically, while we have been relatively successful in pinpointing the benefits of success, we have failed to understand the impact of failure,” said Dashun Wang, corresponding author and associate professor of management and organizations at Kellogg.

    Methodology and findings

    Researchers analyzed records of scientists who, early in their careers, applied for R01 grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) between 1990 and 2005. They utilized the NIH’s evaluation scores to separate individuals into two groups: (1) the “near-misses” whose scores were just below the threshold that received funding and (2) the “just-made-its” whose scores were just above that threshold.

    Researchers then considered how many papers each group published, on average, over the next 10 years and how many of those papers turned out to be hits, as determined by the number of citations those papers received.

    Analysis revealed that individuals in the near-miss group received less funding, but published just as many papers, and more hit papers, than individuals in the just-made-it group.

    The researchers found that individuals in the near-miss funding group were 6.1% more likely to publish a hit paper over the next 10 years compared to scientists in the just-made-it group.

    “The fact that the near-miss group published more hit papers than the just-made-it group is even more surprising when you consider that the just-made-it group received money to further their work, while the near-miss group did not,” said Benjamin Jones, study co-author and the Gordon and Llura Gund Family Professor of Entrepreneurship at Kellogg.

    Researchers wondered whether the effect could be attributed to a “weed-out” phenomenon – that the early-career failure caused some scientists in the near-miss group to exit the field, leaving only the most-determined members. Further analysis revealed that while the attrition rate after failure was 10 percent higher for the near-miss group, that alone could not account for the greater success later in their careers.

    After testing a number of other possible explanations for the long-term success of the near-miss group, researchers could not find any supporting evidence for any of their hypotheses, suggesting other unobservable factors, such as grit or lessons learned, might be at play.

    The research does not contradict the Matthew Effect, but rather suggests a complementary path for those who fail.

    “There is value in failure,” Dashun Wang said. “We have just begun expanding this research into a broader domain and are seeing promising signals of similar effects in other fields.”

    All three researchers involved in the study are faculty in Northwestern’s Center for the Science of Science and Innovation, which is dedicated to understanding the conditions that lead to scientific success and failure.

    Reference: “Early-career setback and future career impact” by Yang Wang, Benjamin F. Jones and Dashun Wang, 1 October 2019, Nature Communications.
    DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-12189-3

    Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.
    Follow us on Google and Google News.

    Behavioral Science Northwestern University
    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Email Reddit

    Related Articles

    New Research Finds Democrats and Republicans Hate the Other Side More Than They Love Their Own

    Site of Male Sexual Desire Uncovered in Brain – Where a Key Gene Named Aromatase Is Present

    Freelancers Workers Are Generally Happier Than Permanent Employees

    Searching for a More Accurate Classification of the Dimensions of Psychopathology

    Protective Factors Are Important in Preventing Violence in Veterans

    Email Data Reveals Global Migration Trends

    Theoretical Model on the Evolution of Cooperation

    7 Million Year Old Footprints Reveal Elephant Social Structure from the Past

    The Less Birds Know, The Better

    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Pinterest
    • YouTube

    Don't Miss a Discovery

    Subscribe for the Latest in Science & Tech!

    Trending News

    Just a Few Breathless Minutes a Day Could Slash Your Risk of 8 Major Diseases

    This Simple Habit Could Cut Your Risk of Dementia by 30%

    Scientists Debunk Rattlesnake Myth That Fooled Hikers and Doctors for Decades

    Scientists Discover Plants Can “Count” – and May Be Smarter Than We Thought

    New Research Reveals Ancient Mars May Have Been Warm, Wet – and Possibly Alive

    This Surprising Daily Habit Could Cut Dementia Risk by 35%

    Just 10 Minutes a Day: Scientists Say This Ancient Chinese Practice Shows Powerful Blood Pressure Benefits

    Scientists Say This Popular Food Could Help Your Body Get Rid of Microplastics

    Follow SciTechDaily
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • YouTube
    • Pinterest
    • Newsletter
    • RSS
    SciTech News
    • Biology News
    • Chemistry News
    • Earth News
    • Health News
    • Physics News
    • Science News
    • Space News
    • Technology News
    Recent Posts
    • NASA’s Artemis II Cleared for Moon Flight As Orion Prepares for Critical Engine Burn
    • NASA Artemis II Crew Scrambles To Fix Unexpected Toilet Failure in Space
    • Surviving Burns May Have Changed Human Evolution
    • Scientists Discover Hidden “Footprint of Death” That Could Transform How We Fight Disease
    • Blood-Sucking Parasites Could Revolutionize Treatment for Autoimmune Diseases
    Copyright © 1998 - 2026 SciTechDaily. All Rights Reserved.
    • Science News
    • About
    • Contact
    • Editorial Board
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.