Past research has been inconsistent in determining the relative importance of ascriptive and achievement conditions for scientific recognition. This paper attempts to resolve some of this inconsistency through (1) a more precise conceptualization of specific forms of scientific recognition, i.e., professional standing and peer consultation status, and (2) the separate application of these concepts to selected ascribed and achieved attributes of a group of biological scientists working at a summer research laboratory. The results of this analysis suggest that while professional standing and peer consultation status are both significantly determined by achievement criteria, they nevertheless represent different social processes operating at different levels of social organization.