publications
Selected publications
2025
-
Does AI Affect Scientific Outcomes?Raffaele Mancuso, Federico Munari, and Laura Toschi2025Starting from 6,671 research grants awarded by the European Research Council in the period between 2008 and 2016 within FP7 and H2020 Programmes, we analyze whether AI-related grants have different productivity rates in terms of scientific outcomes (publications) as compared to a set of similar (not AI- related) grants. We define AI-related grants as projects that develop or use AI technologies to conduct scientific research. We find that the use of AI in research financed by grant funding increases the number of published papers, but those papers get published in lower quality journal and are cited less, while being more likely to becited by third-party patents. There is no effect of AI on the time it takes to publish the first paper. Our results, thus, shed new light on how AI is diffusing in the scientific context and the type of impact it can have.
-
Working from Home and Productivity: Does the Home Space Matter?Submitted to Organization Science, 2025We examine the influence of home space design on the productivity of knowledge workers during work-from-home (WFH). Leveraging boundary theory and architecture concepts on form and function, we propose that reductions in productivity of WFH are moderated by how individuals establish physical boundaries within the home spaces, with significant variations depending on whether they share their living space with other cohabitants. As in the office, where individuals seek physical boundaries from colleagues to protect productivity, at home similar boundaries are needed to save productivity from interactions with cohabitants. We conceptualize different types of boundaries according to the convergence of function and form of the space where individuals work while WFH (i.e., workroom or non-work room), and the extent of time they spend in that room (i.e., temporary or permanent). Treating COVID-19 pandemic as a quasi-experiment, we test our arguments by analyzing 5,170 STEM academics working in Italy and transitioning to WFH. Overall, this study highlights the importance of an underexamined element of WFH – physical space - by shedding light on the complex interplay between home environments, and productivity. Moreover, it provides practical guidance for organizations which are striving to create an inclusive future of work for their employees.
-
Do mission-oriented grant schemes shape the direction of science?Raffaele Mancuso and Anders BroströmUnder Review at Research Policy, 2025A growing literature has examined how applying for and winning competitive project grants affects the career trajectory of scientists in terms of productivity, quality, social networks and knowledge. However, the role of grant schemes in shaping the direction of scientific inquiry remains very poorly understood. In this study, we investigate how the research output of grant recipients, rejected applicants and a set of comparable non-applicants working in the same fields relates to a set of funding calls issued by the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research. These calls are all of the ‘request for applications’ (RFA) type – i.e. targeting a certain type of research that the funder has identified and seeks to strengthen. We analyze topic similarity between applicants’ research and the texts defining the RFA calls. Applying an optimal full matching followed by a difference-in- differences design, we find that – in line with expectations – applicants increase their topic similarity with the call more than non-applicants. However – contrary to expectations – the pace at which the research of the average grant winner shifts towards the topic of the call is not statistically different from that of non-winning applicants. These results can not be explained by differences in post-call productivity. Our findings have important implications for science policy, and for our understanding of how the formulation of RFA calls shape the direction of scientific inquiry.
2023
-
Topic Choice, Gendered Language, and the under-Funding of Female Scholars in Mission-Oriented ResearchRaffaele Mancuso, Cristina Rossi-Lamastra, and Chiara FranzoniResearch Policy, 2023We investigate the participation of male and female applicants to a competition for research funding, using an original dataset with detailed information on both successful and unsuccessful applicants to 21 calls by a mission-oriented funding agency. We use this information to construct a fictitious pool of 277,464 potential applicants and to model their probability to submit an application. We find that, even after controlling for productivity, quality of research, seniority, years of career discontinuity, number of prior applications, affiliation, and ethnicity, women were still less likely to apply than men. The lower likelihood of females to apply was not explained by the use of masculine language in the text of the calls. Instead, women’s research interests were more distant from the topics of the calls than men’s. Topic proximity fully mediated female penalization in the likelihood to apply for research funding. These results are an important heads-up, in view of the increasing focus of governments in mission-oriented programs.
@article{paper2, title = {Topic Choice, Gendered Language, and the under-Funding of Female Scholars in Mission-Oriented Research}, author = {Mancuso, Raffaele and Rossi-Lamastra, Cristina and Franzoni, Chiara}, date = {2023-07-01}, journal = {Research Policy}, volume = {52}, number = {6}, pages = {104758}, year = {2023}, issn = {0048-7333}, doi = {10.1016/j.respol.2023.104758}, url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733323000422}, urldate = {2023-03-28}, langid = {english}, keywords = {Female penalty,Grant funding,Masculine language,Mission-oriented research,Topic mismatch}, dimensions = {true}, }