Growing Up Together in Society (GUTS): A team science effort to predict societal trajectories in adolescence and young adulthood.

Our society faces a great diversity of opportunities for youth. The 10-year Growing Up Together in Society (GUTS) program has the long-term goal to understand which combination of measures best predict societal trajectories, such as school success, mental health, well-being, and developing a sense of belonging in society. Our leading hypothesis is that self-regulation is key to how adolescents successfully navigate the demands of contemporary society. We aim to test these questions using socio-economic, questionnaire (including experience sampling methods), behavioral, brain (fMRI, sMRI, EEG), hormonal, and genetic measures in four large cohorts including adolescents and young adults. Two cohorts are designed as test and replication cohorts to test the developmental trajectory of self-regulation, including adolescents of different socioeconomic status thereby bridging individual, family, and societal perspectives. The third cohort consists of an entire social network to examine how neural and self-regulatory development influences and is influenced by whom adolescents and young adults choose to interact with. The fourth cohort includes youth with early signs of antisocial and delinquent behavior to understand patterns of societal development in individuals at the extreme ends of self-regulation and societal participation, and examines pathways into and out of delinquency. We will complement the newly collected cohorts with data from existing large-scale population-based and case-control cohorts. The study is embedded in a transdisciplinary approach that engages stakeholders throughout the design stage, with a strong focus on citizen science and youth participation in study design, data collection, and interpretation of results, to ensure optimal translation to youth in society.

Gender differences in Dutch research funding over time: A statistical investigation of the innovation scheme 2012-2021.

BACKGROUND: In 2015, the Dutch research council, NWO, took measures to combat gender bias disadvantaging female applicants in a popular three-tiered funding scheme called the Talent Programme. The innovation scheme consists of three grants for different career stages, called Veni, Vidi and Vici. OBJECTIVES: This paper studies the question whether or not NWO has been successful in removing gender differences in their funding procedure. METHODS: Using all available data from 2012 onwards of grant applications in the Talent Programme (16,249 applications of which 2,449 received funding), we study whether these measures had an effect using binomial generalized linear models. RESULTS: We find strong statistical evidence of a shift in gender effects in favour of female applicants in the first tier, the Veni (p < .001). Significant gender differences are not found in the two other tiers, the Vidi and Vici schemes. CONCLUSIONS: In recent years, female applicants are more likely to be awarded with a Veni grant than male applicants and this gender gap has increased over time. This suggests that gender differences still exist in the assessment of Talent Programme submissions, albeit in a different direction than a decade ago.

Gender inequality in cum laude distinctions for PhD students.

Resource allocation in academia is highly skewed, and peer evaluation is the main method used to distribute scarce resources. A large literature documents gender inequality in evaluation, and the explanation for this inequality is homophily: male evaluators give more favorable ratings to male candidates. We investigate this by focusing on cum laude distinctions for PhD students in the Netherlands, a distinction that is only awarded to 5 percent of all dissertations and has as its sole goal to distinguish the top from the rest. Using data from over 5000 PhD recipients of a large Dutch university for the period 2011-2021, we find that female PhD students were almost two times less likely to get a cum laude distinction than their male counterparts, even when they had the same doctoral advisor. This gender gap is largest when dissertations are evaluated by all-male committees and decreases as evaluation committees include more female members.

Observing many researchers using the same data and hypothesis reveals a hidden universe of uncertainty.

This study explores how researchers' analytical choices affect the reliability of scientific findings. Most discussions of reliability problems in science focus on systematic biases. We broaden the lens to emphasize the idiosyncrasy of conscious and unconscious decisions that researchers make during data analysis. We coordinated 161 researchers in 73 research teams and observed their research decisions as they used the same data to independently test the same prominent social science hypothesis: that greater immigration reduces support for social policies among the public. In this typical case of social science research, research teams reported both widely diverging numerical findings and substantive conclusions despite identical start conditions. Researchers' expertise, prior beliefs, and expectations barely predict the wide variation in research outcomes. More than 95% of the total variance in numerical results remains unexplained even after qualitative coding of all identifiable decisions in each team's workflow. This reveals a universe of uncertainty that remains hidden when considering a single study in isolation. The idiosyncratic nature of how researchers' results and conclusions varied is a previously underappreciated explanation for why many scientific hypotheses remain contested. These results call for greater epistemic humility and clarity in reporting scientific findings.

Explaining wage differentials by field of study among higher education graduates: Evidence from a large-scale survey of adult skills.

Why do some fields of study in higher education yield higher wage returns in the labor market than others? Human capital perspectives suggest that differences in skills are a major source of between-fields wage differentials. We assess this explanation using data from the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC). Our pooled analysis of 17,590 graduates from 29 countries indicates that differences in general cognitive (literacy and numeracy) skills matter relatively little, although numeracy skills do play a meaningful role in accounting for the high wages of STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) graduates. Specific skills, proxied by skill use on the job, explain a substantial portion of between-field wage differentials. Remarkably, we find that the sex composition of the field of study remains important after taking skills into account, particularly for explaining the wage advantage of STEM graduates. Comparative analyses grouping the 29 countries into four institutional clusters-Social-democratic, Conservative, Liberal, and Post-communist-show that these general patterns are broadly similar across different institutional contexts.

The Matthew effect in science funding.

A classic thesis is that scientific achievement exhibits a "Matthew effect": Scientists who have previously been successful are more likely to succeed again, producing increasing distinction. We investigate to what extent the Matthew effect drives the allocation of research funds. To this end, we assembled a dataset containing all review scores and funding decisions of grant proposals submitted by recent PhDs in a €2 billion granting program. Analyses of review scores reveal that early funding success introduces a growing rift, with winners just above the funding threshold accumulating more than twice as much research funding (€180,000) during the following eight years as nonwinners just below it. We find no evidence that winners' improved funding chances in subsequent competitions are due to achievements enabled by the preceding grant, which suggests that early funding itself is an asset for acquiring later funding. Surprisingly, however, the emergent funding gap is partly created by applicants, who, after failing to win one grant, apply for another grant less often.

Vocational education and employment over the life course using a new measure of occupational specificity.

Vocational education is seen as beneficial for the labor market allocation of young people. However, recent studies point to disadvantages later in the life course, where the specific skills that are obtained from vocational education decrease employability. This paper re-evaluates this hypothesis for the Netherlands with an improved measure for the vocational specificity of educational programs, utilizing both vertical (level) and horizontal (field) information on education. More specifically, we use a gradual measure for the linkage strength between education and occupation to predict employment over the life course. Using data from the national Dutch labor force surveys, we show that there is considerable heterogeneity in occupational specificity within the categories of vocational and general educational programs that is masked when using a dichotomous classification of general versus vocational education. In the life course analyses we find that the large early benefits of having vocational education disappear later in the career and turn into a small disadvantage before retirement.

Grandparents' resources and grandchildren's schooling: Does grandparental involvement moderate the grandparent effect?

Recent studies have argued that grandparents have a direct effect on grandchildren's achievements, net of parental resources. However, little is known about the underlying mechanisms. One explanation is that grandchildren can benefit from the cultural resources that grandparents transmit to their grandchildren. If this is the case, one would expect strong effects in families where grandparents are highly involved in the lives of their grandchildren and weak or no effects in other families. Using new nationally representative survey data on three generations in the Netherlands, we examine if and how grandchildren's educational attainment is affected by three grandparental resources: education, occupational status, and cultural resources. We explore how these effects vary by the strength of the tie between grandparent and grandchild. We find no evidence for a main direct grandparental effect, nor do we find interactions with the strength of the tie between grandparent and grandchild. These null-findings are discussed in light of the mixed body of evidence that has been accumulated in the literature and contemporary theorizing on grandparenting.

Economic returns to occupational closure in the German skilled trades.

Recent sociological studies argue that wage differentials between occupations are partly attributable to occupational closure. Occupations set up barriers which restrict the supply of occupational labor, thereby generating an economic rent. In this article we study occupational closure in the skilled trades of Germany, where the Trade and Crafts code restricts self-employment in 41 occupations to those who are master craftsmen. Newly gathered occupational data about the Trade and Crafts code is mapped on micro data from the German Microcensus of 2006. The central finding of our empirical analyses is that self-employed workers with comparable levels of human capital and demographic characteristics earn structurally more in closed occupations. We argue that this earnings premium is a rent, obtained by self-employed because of the entry restriction that is laid down by the Trade and Crafts code.