Distrust in grant peer review—reasons and remedies

IF 2.6 4区 管理学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Liv Langfeldt, Ingvild Reymert, Silje Marie Svartefoss
{"title":"Distrust in grant peer review—reasons and remedies","authors":"Liv Langfeldt, Ingvild Reymert, Silje Marie Svartefoss","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract With the increasing reliance on competitive grants to fund research, we see a review system under pressure. While peer review has long been perceived as the cornerstone of self-governance in science, researchers have expressed distrust in the peer review procedures of funding agencies. This paper draws on literature pointing out ability, benevolence, and integrity as important for trustworthiness and explores the conditions under which researchers have confidence in grant review. Based on rich survey material, we find that researchers trust grant reviewers far less than they trust journal peer reviewers or their colleagues’ ability to assess their research. Yet, scholars who have success with grant proposals or serve on grant review panels appear to have more trust in grant reviewers. We conclude that transparency and reviewers with field competencies are crucial for trust in grant review and discuss how this can be ensured.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad051","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract With the increasing reliance on competitive grants to fund research, we see a review system under pressure. While peer review has long been perceived as the cornerstone of self-governance in science, researchers have expressed distrust in the peer review procedures of funding agencies. This paper draws on literature pointing out ability, benevolence, and integrity as important for trustworthiness and explores the conditions under which researchers have confidence in grant review. Based on rich survey material, we find that researchers trust grant reviewers far less than they trust journal peer reviewers or their colleagues’ ability to assess their research. Yet, scholars who have success with grant proposals or serve on grant review panels appear to have more trust in grant reviewers. We conclude that transparency and reviewers with field competencies are crucial for trust in grant review and discuss how this can be ensured.
对拨款同行评审的不信任——原因和补救措施
随着越来越多地依赖竞争性资助来资助研究,我们看到审查系统面临压力。虽然同行评议长期以来一直被视为科学自我管理的基石,但研究人员对资助机构的同行评议程序表示了不信任。本文借鉴文献,指出能力、仁爱和诚信是可信度的重要因素,并探讨了研究人员在资助审查中有信心的条件。基于丰富的调查资料,我们发现研究人员对基金审稿人的信任远远低于他们对期刊同行审稿人或同事评估其研究能力的信任。然而,在资助提案中取得成功的学者或在资助评审小组中任职的学者似乎对资助评审人员更信任。我们得出结论,透明度和具有领域能力的审稿人对于拨款审查的信任至关重要,并讨论了如何确保这一点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: Science and Public Policy is a leading refereed, international journal on public policies for science, technology and innovation, and on their implications for other public policies. It covers basic, applied, high, low, and any other types of S&T, and rich or poorer countries. It is read in around 70 countries, in universities (teaching and research), government ministries and agencies, consultancies, industry and elsewhere.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信