Does March Madness Undermine University Research?

Professor Charles Clotfelter, from Duke's Sanford School Public Policy, has been studying the effects of NCAA March Madness on research activity.  He focused on levels of JSTOR research activity on Mondays through Wednesdays, from February through April each year.  He found that, in the weeks leading up to Selection Sunday, research on JSTOR inched up about 5% each week.  In the week following Selection Sunday, however, JSTOR use plunged 6%.  Worse yet, at schools with teams in the tourney who won toss-up games, research tumbled downward 14% over the course of the competition.  From a well-timed Duke press release about the study:

"By all appearances, fans of losing teams shook off the disappointment and returned to work in greater numbers or with greater diligence, while the fans of winning teams continued to follow their team into the next round,” [Clotfelter] said. “Such an effect would imply an ironic sort of ‘winner’s curse,’ where students and researchers at universities whose teams win unexpectedly do less work than those whose favorite teams are also-rans."

Cross-posted at Brian Leiter's Law School Reports, where I am guest blogging this week.

Comments

[Alfred Brophy]

That's a really creative use of JSTOR data!

I'd like to add that basketball has little adverse effect on my research, even last year when we were number 1. But politics.... Now they're a real distractor.

[Noah]

What a great idea for a study! Though I suspect, somewhat ironically, a school's *reputation* actually increases with tournament success, irrespective of research losses. Maybe not at Duke, UNC, or other big-basketball or big-academic schools; but I suspect that getting a job with a George Mason degree got at least incrementally easier after 2006's Final Four team taught America that George Mason is a university, not just a patriot.

[Beer koozies]

What U share above really help me a lot, It blow away my wondering ! So thankful !