Fig. 6: Hierarchies of prestige.
From: Quantifying hierarchy and dynamics in US faculty hiring and retention
a, Prestige change from doctorate to faculty job in the US faculty hiring network (n = 238,281; Methods), with ranks normalized to the unit interval and 1.0 being the most prestigious. The proportions of faculty at universities less prestigious than their doctorate are annotated as 'move down' (open bars), at universities more prestigious than their doctorates as 'move up' (hatched) and at the same university as self-hires (solid). b, Rank change among faculty in the US faculty hiring network, by domain, using the same shading scheme as in Fig. 1a. c, Comparison between empirical hierarchies and those from 1,000 draws from a null model of randomly rewired hiring networks (Methods), quantified through upward mobility. Fields above the diagonal reference line exhibit steeper hierarchies than can be explained by department size and faculty production inequalities alone. Circles, Benjamini–Hochberg-corrected P < 0.05, network null model (Methods); crosses, not significant; no field was significantly less steep than expected. d, Heatmap of pairwise Pearson correlations between prestige hierarchies of fields.
