Entangled but Unequal: Scientific Authorization as a Ceiling on Computational Expertise

• In Event: Organizations, Occupations, and Work Section Roundtables
  In Refereed Roundtable (90 minute): Table 24: High-status Occupations and Technological Change

Abstract

As computational practices become central to scientific work, a key question arises: does computational skill constitute an independent form of expertise, or does it derive authority from roles already recognized as scientific? Using data from the National Survey of College Graduates (2013–2023), I distinguish between scientific authorization—whether a job requires scientific expertise—and computational enactment—sustained engagement in programming or systems development. Across occupations, scientific authorization consistently exceeds computational enactment: many authorized roles involve limited computational work, whereas sustained computational engagement rarely occurs outside roles with scientific authorization, indicating that scientific authorization sets a structural ceiling on where such work is concentrated. Computational enactment commands wage premiums primarily within scientifically authorized roles; outside them, those premiums disappear once differences between occupations are taken into account. Women and men receive modest and statistically similar premiums within authorized roles, but computational enactment provides no independent wage advantage—and carries a wage penalty for women—outside them. By analytically separating authorization from enactment, this study shows that computational work generates economic returns and stratifying consequences only when embedded within regimes of scientific authorization rather than as an autonomous basis of expertise.

Author

• Peter Boseong Yun, Yale University