Abstract
The aging of the scientific workforce and graying of grant recipients are central policy concerns in biomedicine. These trends are potentially important because older scientists are often seen as less open to new ideas than younger scientists. In this paper, we put this hypothesis to an empirical test. Using a measure of new ideas derived from the text of nearly all biomedical scientific articles published since 1946, we compare the tendency of younger and older researchers to try out new ideas in their work. We find that papers published in biomedicine by younger researchers are more likely to build on new ideas. Collaboration with an experienced researcher matters as well. Papers with a young first author and a more experienced last author are more likely to try out newer ideas than papers published by other team configurations. Given the crucial role that the trying out of new ideas plays in the advancement of science, our results buttress the case for funding scientific work by young researchers but also provide a caution against unconditional idolatry of youth over experience.