Is the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) turning down deserving research proposals because of potential biases in the grant-review process? The answer may be yes, if preliminary findings of an experiment being conducted by NSF officials holds up.
A recent study described in science magazine, cites one researcher who was ranked highly only by a set of reviewers only in the case where her name was withheld from them. She concludes: "The current system is definitely a 'a buddy system' where it's not what you know but who you know, where you work, and where you publish. And the rich get richer".
Ouch. Has it gotten that bad at NSF gotten? Maybe so. But at least it is still less biased than NIH...
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Today I got several emails, each asking for my views on a proposed change to the format for National Institutes of Health grant proposals. This may seem of only parochial interest except to those of us who make our living applying for NIH grants, but how health research is funded is of interest to…
As an academic researcher I don't write grant proposals for a living, although sometimes it feels like I do. I need grants to do my work, but I also need to get to work and I don't consider myself to be commuting for a living. Although sometimes it feels like I do. Having said that, low on my list…
Most of you don't want to hear about my grant writing any more, but some of you are clearly interested in one of our innovations (at least I think it's an innovation; I've never heard of anyone doing it on this scale before): the Mock Study Section. So I'll take a break from writing (actually, re-…
This week's question in the Ask a ScienceBlogger series is:
What's the most underfunded scientific field that shouldn't be underfunded?
The first and obvious answer is, of course, "my field", whatever it is.
But then....
But then I thought about my own field of chronobiology and I think that its…