The Mateus effect is the sociological name for a phenomenon of accumulation of property, wealth or fame.
Although the use of this term was first attributed to sociologist Robert K. Merton in an article published in 1968, its use extended to other disciplines such as economics, psychology and education.
- This term refers to both material goods.
- As well as money.
- As well as intangible values.
- Such as trust or social prestige.
He was originally called the Matthew effect by the biblical quotation from chapter 13, verse 12 of the Gospel of Matthew (repeated in Matthew 25, 29, and other evangelists on five different occasions).
This biblical passage says: “He who has, he shall be given all, and shall have it abundantly; but whoever doesn’t have it will be taken away from him to what he has. “In the field of education, Canadian psychologist Keith Stanovich, who analyzed the fact and called it the Matthew effect.
Do you want to be rich? So don’t be anxious to increase your assets, but to diminish your greed. Gourmet?
There are many observations about the Matthew effect, let’s look at some depending on the area in which it appears.
In the scientific field, there is a sensational experiment conducted a decade ago: a team of scientists has selected some 50 articles by renowned researchers who have worked at major American universities, published a few years earlier.
Scientists changed the titles of the articles, invented fiction authors working at lower-ranking universities, and sent them to the same newspapers where they were previously published, and almost all articles were rejected.
When interpreted in the opposite direction, the so-called Stigler law occurs. In many cases, scientific findings are not named after the person who first discovered them.
In education it would be something similar to the Pygmy effect, which draws attention to the development of students who receive more attention and are subject to the more optimistic expectations of the teacher, to the detriment of the good evolution of others.
The Matthew effect is closely related to merton’s so-called self-fulfilling prophecy.
Canadian psychologist Keith Stanovich observed that those who acquired “wealth” in written and oral expression from an early age have increasingly strengthened these skills.
Those who took too long to acquire them felt unsuccessful and resisted again because of a bad experience, so they read and write less.
This sentiment made them more and more disadvantaged compared to those who already mastered reading and writing and who, satisfied with their results, practiced more and more.
This has given them an advantage in terms of academic success and in their future studies.
“In science, recognition is given to the man who convinces the world, not the man who proposes the new idea. “William Osler?
In sociology, we could give the following example: the Bank will provide a loan more easily to those who can demonstrate that it has greater guarantees (i. e. the one with the most) and not the poor. who probably needs the money.
In this way, the rich will become richer and the poor poor poorer
This has two sides, usually antagonistic, in the words of Jimenez (2009):
It is at the top of a local, regional, national or global classification or category, and being classified as the best, is the most favored, overrated and often eclipses the rest.
They tend to be much lower than expected when considering the resources available to them in the first place; in the extreme case, those who have the least are stripped of their own, which is paradoxically given to those who have the most.
“Wealth is like salt water, the more you drink, the thirst the more you become. “Arthur Schopenhauer?
One way to correct the negative effects of the Mateus effect is to prioritize participation over competitiveness, another way is to put in place mechanisms that protect the most disadvantaged.
The most radical way to do this would be to provide assistance in the opposite direction, i. e. to help the poorest, those who know less or those who have less, ultimately, to correct inequality.