Collaborative Research: How do publication and funding filters shape the science that we do, and how we learn from it?

合作研究：出版物和资助过滤器如何塑造我们所做的科学，以及我们如何从中学习？

基本信息

批准号：
1952343
负责人：
Kevin Gross
金额：
$ 7.5万
依托单位：
North Carolina State University
依托单位国家：
美国
项目类别：
Standard Grant
财政年份：
2020
资助国家：
美国
起止时间：
2020-09-01 至 2023-08-31
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1952343&HistoricalAwards=false
关键词：
Collaborative Research How do publication

项目摘要

Science provides an extraordinarily powerful tool for investigating nature, and nature supplies anendless abundance of research topics that are ripe for scientists to investigate. Faced with suchabundance, scientists must regularly choose where to place their efforts: which questions to pursue andwhich to leave for another day, which results to prepare for publication and which to set aside, and soon. When making these decisions, researchers face incentives that scientific funders and scientificjournals create through the peer‐review processes that funders and journals use to ensure quality andrigor in the science they support and publish. Yet we understand very little about how the incentivescreated by peer‐review in scientific funding and publication shape the scientific activity of individualinvestigators, and how those decisions scale up to impact the aggregate knowledge that science creates.In this project, we will develop new mathematical theory to understand how incentives created byscientific funders and journals affect individual scientific activity and the subsequent production ofscientific knowledge. This theory will provide a foundation for evaluating proposed refinements offunding or publication practices, and for understanding whether these changes will nudge the scientificenterprise towards a more reliable and expansive understanding of the natural world.We will focus on two questions. First, how do journals' publication decisions shape the ability of theirreadership to learn from the scientific literature? Second, how do the incentives created by funding andpublication structures motivate scientists to work on certain projects and shy away from others? Foreach question, we will ask how peer‐review filters function differently for basic versus applied research.We will investigate these questions by building and analyzing mathematical models that incorporateelements of information theory, economics, forecasting assessment, and statistics. In the long run, thiswork will deepen our understanding of science as a social process by revealing how scientific institutionsgenerate incentives that shape the direction of scientific inquiry. More immediately, it will provide atheoretical framework to explore how possible changes to the peer‐review process such as registeredreports or pre‐print servers may change scientists' collective process of learning and discovery. Finally,we will develop an online module to help readers become savvier consumers of the scientific literature,and we will share our findings with the editorial board of a leading biological journal.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.

科学为调查自然提供了一种非常有力的工具，自然提供了无数的研究主题，这些主题是科学家进行调查的成熟的。面对这样的经验，科学家必须定期选择在哪里放置他们的努力：要购买哪些问题，哪些问题要离开一天，这是为出版做准备以及待在一边的结果。在做出这些决定时，研究人员面临激励措施，即科学资金和科学期刊通过同行评审过程创造，这些过程将资金和期刊用于确保他们支持和发布的科学中的优质Andrigor。然而，我们对科学资金和出版物中的同伴审查的激励如何塑造了单个评估者的科学活动，以及这些决策如何扩展以影响科学创造的总体知识。我们将开发新的数学理论，以了解如何通过科学的基金和期刊来影响个人科学的科学知识，我们将开发出新的数学理论。该理论将为评估提议的改进或出版实践提供基础，并了解这些变化是否会推动科学企业对对自然世界的更可靠，更广泛的了解。我们将重点关注两个问题。首先，期刊的出版决策如何塑造其阅读量从科学文献中学习的能力？其次，资金和出版物结构分子科学家从事某些项目并回避其他项目的激励措施如何？对于AEACH问题，我们将询问同行评审过滤器如何在基本研究和应用研究中的功能不同。我们将通过构建和分析的数学模型来调查这些问题，这些模型结合了信息理论，经济学，预测评估和统计数据。从长远来看，这项工作将通过揭示科学机构如何塑造科学探究方向的激励措施来加深我们对科学作为社会过程的理解。更直接，它将提供理论框架，以探讨同行评审过程（例如注册报告或印刷服务器）可能会改变科学家的集体学习和发现过程。最后，我们将开发一个在线模块，以帮助读者成为科学文献的更美味的消费者，我们将与领先的生物学期刊的编辑委员会分享我们的发现。该奖项反映了NSF的法定任务，并被认为是通过基金会的知识分子优点和更广泛的影响审查标准来通过评估来获得的支持。

项目成果

期刊论文数量（1）

专著数量（0）

科研奖励数量（0）

会议论文数量（0）

专利数量（0）

Why ex post peer review encourages high-risk research while ex ante review discourages it

DOI：
10.1073/pnas.2111615118
发表时间：
2021-12-21
期刊：
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
影响因子：
11.1
作者：
Gross, Kevin;Bergstrom, Carl T.
通讯作者：
Bergstrom, Carl T.