I do not believe this type of study exists. One would believe it is not the programming paradigm that matters as much as the actual algorithm that is used. For instance given any non-trivial system one that relies on small space algorithms verse one that relies on small time algorithms would generate different metrics. The one that has the better time would most likely be deemed more valid, unless space is an issue then the inverse is true. I find it similar to paving a road. While the algorithm or recipe for making the materials is constant throughout all processes it would be possible one company thinks paving two lanes at once (one on each side of the road) is better than paving two lanes on the same side of the road at once. At the end of the day it doesn't matter as the process of making the black top is still the same, the only difference is the approach. Going back to programming, if you have a team of C developers, write the code in a procedural manner, if you have a team of Java developers write it in OO. Do not get hung up on the paradigm so much as the implementation of the algorithm. Because at the end of the day you can write Java like C and you can try to write C like Java.
UPDATE
To reply to the comment graham left me:
I assume by architecture you mean programming paradigm. If you are going to use Clojure maybe you should hire a team of Clojure programmers. However, based on a quick search Clojure is a Java based language it just so happens to be functional. Given that information I would take the Java programmers (since technically they can just write Java and it will give you the same results) or look for functional programmers such as Haskell developers. Now in terms of choosing what is best it is completely dependent on your team. I would never have a team of relational database experts organize a cloud solution for me nor would I have a team of functional programmers build out an object orient solution for me. You have to use the strengths of the team you have not the glorified vision you have in your head for what a team "should" be able to do.