Median Watch

Eyes on statistics

Beating the panel drum

There’s been another call to “Bring back panels!” for the NHMRC, this time published in Science. These calls normally appear on social media on the day of major funding announcements, when the majority of people find out that they’ve been unsuccessful and vent their frustrations. There are some scientists who, when their applications are rejected, don’t consider that it was bad luck or that there’s some flaw in their ideas. Instead, they conclude that the system must be wrong and therefore must be changed.

Research Grant System Teeters on the Cusp of an AI Hellscape

Reproduced from Future Campus.

Last week, I blocked out two hours of protected time in my diary for “grant writing”. I’ve done this before, but the difference this time was that at the end of two hours I had a nearly finished NHMRC Ideas Grant. Of course I used AI. I used PRISM, a new free tool from OpenAI designed for academic writing. I gave PRISM the Ideas Grant criteria, a document on what makes a good application, and a title and an aim.

Funding schemes that cost more than they award: part 2

“What is the purpose of research funding?” Phew, that is a big question. If I could hear your answers, I am sure there would be a wide range of opinions. Let’s put that in the too hard basket. What about this question, “What should research funding not do?" Again, I can imagine lots of answers, but there are likely some answers that we could all agree on. How about an axiom that “A research funding scheme should never cost more than it awards.

Scientific fraud is rising, and automated systems won’t stop it. We need research detectives

Reposted from The Conversation. Fraud in science is alarmingly common. Sometimes researchers lie about results and invent data to win funding and prestige. Other times, researchers might pay to stage and publish entirely bogus studies to win an undeserved pay rise – fuelling a “paper mill” industry worth an estimated €1 billion a year. Some of this rubbish can be easily spotted by peer reviewers, but the peer review system has become badly stretched by ever-rising paper numbers.

What to do when applying for research grants is a waste of time for almost everybody

Reposted with permission from Campus Morning Mail. Researchers have a dark sense of humour when it comes to research funding. One of my favourite sneers was from the ecologist Terry McGlynn who said, “instead of writing this grant, I should walk the whole country and get a penny from each person. Same amount of money, but less hassle.” Applicants to last year’s early- and mid-career Medical Research Future Fund fellowships may be wishing that they had gone on a long walk rather sitting at their computers, with speculated success rates at under 5 per cent.