Measuring Bias, Burden and Conservatism in Research Funding Processes
Published in: F1000 Research, Volume 8, No. 851 (2019). doi: 10.12688/f1000research.19156.1
Posted on RAND.org on June 14, 2019
Read More
Access further information on this document at F1000 ResearchThis article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.
Background
Grant funding allocation is a complex process that in most cases relies on peer review. A recent study identified a number of challenges associated with the use of peer review in the evaluation of grant proposals. Three important issues identified were bias, burden, and conservatism, and the work concluded that further experimentation and measurement is needed to assess the performance of funding processes.
Methods
We have conducted a review of international practice in the evaluation and improvement of grant funding processes in relation to bias, burden and conservatism, based on a rapid evidence assessment and interviews with research funding agencies.
Results
The evidence gathered suggests that efforts so far to measure these characteristics systematically by funders have been limited. However, there are some examples of measures and approaches which could be developed and more widely applied.
Conclusion
The majority of the literature focuses primarily on the application and assessment process, whereas burden, bias and conservatism can emerge as challenges at many wider stages in the development and implementation of a grant funding scheme. In response to this we set out a wider conceptualisation of the ways in which this could emerge across the funding process.
This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.
Research conducted by
This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.
Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.