The search for the best programmers is more complex than we imagine. We've seen country-based rankings that didn't convince everyone, and factors like automation and the constant evolution of tools cast doubt on the whole process. However, a new study by researchers at Texas A&M and Oklahoma universities suggests the ideal path is to break certain trends and look for programmers the market unfairly calls "old," simply because they possess enormous experience and work faster.
Want to learn to code? No problem, we have some tips for you, and there are interesting tools like a typeface designed for those who spend hours staring at code. But once you're comfortable with your skills and decide to look for new challenges, you'll likely find job offers with ridiculous requirements like "18 to 24 years old with eleven years of experience." That's a problem the market recognizes... and refuses to fix. Companies want "off-the-rack employees" who don't need training, and at the same time present a "young profile" more compatible with modern demands. Well... guess what? The best programmers are not them.
Old Programmers? Age Is Just a Number
Ned Kock, Murad Moqbel, Yusun Jung, and Thant Syn, four researchers from Texas A&M and Oklahoma universities, decided to explore the performance of "older" programmers with an experiment involving 140 students aged 19 to 54 (median 23). Before starting, all participants were taught how to create a small application in Microsoft Visual Basic. Each had one hour to build a basic program that helps PhD program directors make admission decisions. The results reveal that age is positively associated with experience and stress, while experience is positively associated with performance. In other words, the work of the "old" is of higher quality, and they move better under pressure. A common factor was difficulty due to lack of knowledge. Those programmers without sufficient skill ended up stressed by the experiment, regardless of age.
Other data comes from the popular portal Stack Overflow. Thanks to a couple of charts, we can see that the number of answered questions by site members shows an upward trend with age, while the number of questions asked tends to go the opposite direction. Perceived reputation among programmers also grows with age, making veterans true coding eminences. This brings us to the concepts of fluid and crystallized intelligence. Fluid intelligence is the strongest point of young programmers, their adaptability and flexibility in solving problems beyond acquired knowledge. Fluid intelligence starts to lose traction as we get older, with early signs of decline between 30 and 40. In contrast, crystallized intelligence (defined as the ability to combine and apply skill, prior knowledge, and experience deeply and accurately) is an advantage of expert programmers, growing throughout adulthood and only deteriorating at a very advanced age.
Unfortunately, it will take some time before major market players fully understand this situation, which already shows significant negative consequences. One key indicator is salary: At all educational levels, a programmer's pay (which we can also calculate thanks to Stack Overflow) starts to decline after 40 just because the worker is "older." As if that weren't enough, permanent age bias undermines creativity, innovation, and productivity, three critical elements for any software team. Have you seen this bias in action? Do you think your company is making a mistake by not adding more experienced people? Leave a comment.
