This paper studies the publication productivity of inbreds and non-inbreds among Russian academics. Existing literature provides ambiguous results on the relationship between inbred status and productivity. This may be explained by the use of different indicators for measuring publication productivity. We use data, which include indicators of both current publication productivity (at a certain point of time) and cumulative productivity (throughout the career) to identify whether inbreds and non-inbreds differ in their productivity. We did not find any difference in current publication productivity of inbreds and non-inbreds. We found, however, a difference in their cumulative publication productivity: non-inbreds are being more productive on an individual level throughout their careers. Although the conclusions are based on the Russian data, the analysis provides an explanation for existing contradictory results on the relationship between academic inbreeding and productivity in general.
This paper examines the characteristics of students admitted to Russian universities with different levels of selectivity. First, we argue that students differ not only by the results of the Unified State Exam (USE), the university entrance exam, but by family and school characteristics, and by educational strategies. Next, it is shown that the probability of being admitted to the most selective HEIs is determined not only by the USE scores, but by characteristics that are not directly related to the applicants’ abilities, such as class specialisation in secondary schools, and high school location. Moreover, we have found that income has an indirect impact on the admission results: a higher level of income increases the probability of being admitted to highly selective universities through the level of investment in pre-entry coaching and the regional differences in wages. On the other hand, regional differences in costs of living decrease the opportunities of studying in selective universities. Hence, schooling and financial barriers without alternative student support can limit the participation of less affluent students in selective universities.