Can a colleague at your university who serves on a study section you hope to be reviewed on give you advice about your grant or is that a conflict of interest?
Can a colleague at your university who serves on a study section you hope to be reviewed on give you advice about your grant or is that a conflict of interest?
Got to run a workshop for recipients of Villum Experiment Scheme last week. A scheme designed to fund risky research with 2 page anonymous applications and panel member ‘decisive vote’.
https://veluxfoundations.dk/en/technical-and-scientific-research/villum-experiment
Interviewed Andreas Mayer of University of Lausanne, an ex-panel member, by Teams live (a terrifying dependence on technology).
Asked how he spotted the ‘bullshit' in applications?
He answered: by looking where there were lots of buzzwords and jargon.
I agree with barring reviewers of grants and papers from using AI because they risk disclosing confidential information that the reviewer does not have the right to disclose.
But if it's your own findings, I say knock yourself out!
“FUNDERS. Pssstt you need to fund folx who have expertise for peer review in anti-racism, racism, equity, diversity, inclusion work to REVIEW-At same level you do the grant awards. Otherwise we are gonna keep getting racist reviews. The exact folx who could review are applying 🤡”
I suppose it's worth a try, altho I am a little skeptical that it can work
"The US National Institutes of Health (NIH) has released a tentative plan to change how its research grant applications are scored, with the aim of reducing bias and lowering the burden on reviewers. Under the new system, reviewers would no longer rate researchers’ expertise or their institutions’ access to resources, and there would be fewer scoring criteria overall."
#NIH #Bias #grantreview
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-04385-x