  Since the publication of Robert K. Merton's theory of cumulative advantage in
science (Matthew Effect), several empirical studies have tried to measure its
presence at the level of papers, individual researchers, institutions or
countries. However, these studies seldom control for the intrinsic "quality" of
papers or of researchers--"better" (however defined) papers or researchers
could receive higher citation rates because they are indeed of better quality.
Using an original method for controlling the intrinsic value of
papers--identical duplicate papers published in different journals with
different impact factors--this paper shows that the journal in which papers are
published have a strong influence on their citation rates, as duplicate papers
published in high impact journals obtain, on average, twice as much citations
as their identical counterparts published in journals with lower impact
factors. The intrinsic value of a paper is thus not the only reason a given
paper gets cited or not; there is a specific Matthew effect attached to
journals and this gives to paper published there an added value over and above
their intrinsic quality.
