Working Paper: NBER ID: w15838
Authors: David Galenson
Abstract: Recent research has shown that all the arts have had important practitioners of two different types -- conceptual innovators who make their greatest contributions early in their careers, and experimental innovators who produce their greatest work later in their lives. This contradicts a persistent but mistaken belief that artistic creativity has been dominated by the young. We do not yet have systematic studies of the relative importance of conceptual and experimental innovators in the sciences. But in the absence of such studies, it may be damaging for economic growth to continue to assume that innovations in science are made only by the young.
Keywords: No keywords provided
JEL Codes: Z11
Edges that are evidenced by causal inference methods are in orange, and the rest are in light blue.
| Cause | Effect |
|---|---|
| age (J14) | quality and significance of artistic contributions (Z11) |
| recognition of late bloomers (J26) | overall rate of innovation in arts and sciences (O39) |
| funding bias towards younger researchers (I22) | economic growth (O49) |
| reallocating research funding to support older experimental innovators (O32) | innovative activity (O35) |
| innovative activity (O35) | economic growth (O49) |