scholarly journals The Interdependence of Research Funding Concentration, Policy Priorities, and Problem Choice

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emil Bargmann Madsen
Keyword(s):  
Research Funding ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Research Topics ◽  
Research Systems ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Problem Choice ◽  
Funding Success ◽  
Research Councils ◽  
Funding Distribution ◽  
Topical Diversity

The prioritisation of research funding towards a small elite of researchers and research topics of "strategic" importance are becoming a norm across national research systems. Researchers are increasingly worried that such steering hampers the diversity of scientific approaches and problems addressed. However, the effects of increased steering of who and what receives research funds are not well known. I use evidence from 65,000 research grants awarded by seven research councils in the United Kingdom and fifteen Danish research funders to investigate how strong funding concentration and thematic targeting leads to less topical diversity. Researchers in the very top of the funding distribution primarily investigate topics and disciplines with the most funding success, and research output form targeted funding schemes overlaps with that from investigatorledgrants. Moreover, priorities from private funders line up with the type of researchfunded by public research councils. The findings highlight how steering through funding decisions can multiply

A False Start

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Herbert
Keyword(s):  
Research Funding ◽  
Research Council ◽  
National Income ◽  
White Paper ◽  
Department Of Education ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
False Start ◽  
The Government ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Research Councils

In general, modern governments invest only a small portion of the national income to the generation of new knowledge. In the United Kingdom, the Department of Science and Industrial Research carried out this task until 1965. Then the Science and Technology Act changed responsibility for the curiosity-driven research to five Research Councils which are funded through the Department of Education and Science. In 1993, a White Paper, Realizing Our Potential called for the reorganization of the Research Councils. This chapter discusses the struggles of the establishment and recognition of the need for Council for Research in the Humanities. In 1961, the British Academy suggested for the creation of Council for Research in the Humanities, however it was not granted in the legislation made in 1965. Instead, a separate Research Council for social science was established, which opened up the possibility of creating a separate Research Council for Humanities. In 1990s, discussions on the reorganization of UK research funding reopened the question of how the government funds and supports research in humanities. It also opened talks for the establishment of a freestanding Humanities Research Council. Sometime in 1992, after deliberate considerations of the possible contributions of a separate research council on humanities, a recommendation for the establishment of Humanities Research Council was made. However, on the same year, the government decided not to set up an agency that would support humanities, and, in 1993, the government made a firm decision not to include humanities in any form to the circle of Research Councils — a decision which irked humanities scholars and academy members.

scholarly journals Diversity or Disparity? The Concentration of Funded Research Topics in the United Kingdom

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emil Bargmann Madsen
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Public Funding ◽  
Path Dependency ◽  
Power Structures ◽  
Research Topics ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Societal Needs ◽  
Path Dependent ◽  
Using Data

The misalignment between societal needs and the priorities of conducted research have spurred calls for more attention to what types of research is actually funded. At the same time, published research exhibits strong path dependency by becoming more focused on well-established and reoccurring topics. The distribution of attention over various topics reflect the broader political economy and power structures in science, but whether path dependency starts already at the funding stage is largely unknown. In this article, I ask how skewed and path dependent the distribution of research funding is with respect to research topics. Using data on public funding of more than 30,000 research projects in the United Kingdom since 2006, I show that competitive public research funding is consistently concentrated on a minority of topics. These privileged topics continue to attract the majority of funding over time, and generally stay within the top parts of the funding distribution. Funding of research topics thus seems to follow a process of cumulative advantage, but while higher prior funding levels predicts higher subsequent funding, there is a decreasing marginal return.

scholarly journals Towards inclusive funding practices for early career researchers

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (01) ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte M. de Winde ◽  
Sarvenaz Sarabipour ◽  
Hugo Carignano ◽  
Sejal Davla ◽  
David Eccles ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Funding ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
New Principal ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Track Record ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
Global Representation ◽  
Funding Success ◽  
Funding Distribution

Securing research funding is a challenge faced by most scientists in academic institutions worldwide. Funding success rates for all career stages are low, but the burden falls most heavily on early career researchers (ECRs). These are young investigators in training and new principal investigators who have a shorter track record. ECRs are dependent on funding to establish their academic careers. The low number of career development awards and the lack of sustained research funding result in the loss of ECR talent in academia. Several steps in the current funding process, from grant conditions to review, play significant roles in the distribution of funds. Furthermore, there is an imbalance where certain research disciplines and labs of influential researchers receive more funding. As a group of ECRs with global representation, we examined funding practices, barriers, and facilitators to the current funding systems. We also identified alternatives to the most common funding distribution practices, such as diversifying risk or awarding grants on a partly random basis. Here, we detail recommendations for funding agencies and grant reviewers to improve ECR funding prospects worldwide and promote a fairer and more inclusive funding landscape for ECRs.

scholarly journals National Research Funding for Sustainable Growth in Translation Studies as an Academic Discipline in China

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (18) ◽  
pp. 7241
Author(s):  
Zhiwei Jiang ◽  
Yun Wu ◽  
Linda Tsung
Keyword(s):  
Research Funding ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Academic Discipline ◽  
Translation Studies ◽  
Sustainable Growth ◽  
Academic Disciplines ◽  
Global Changes ◽  
Arts And Humanities ◽  
Survival And Development ◽  
Quantitative Manner

Global changes in both the current economic climate and political priorities have posed significant challenges concerning government spending on research, which undermines the survival and development of a number of academic disciplines, especially those in arts and humanities. This article reports on an inquiry that examines whether and how national research funding has supported the development of translation studies as an academic discipline in China, employing the example of the National Social Science Fund of China (NSSFC) subsidy, as allocated to the field of translation studies. Firstly, we accessed the NSSFC database for all programs featuring translation and translation studies between 2010 and 2019. Secondly, we coded, categorized, and processed the data in a quantitative manner. Our examination of the number of grants, research focuses, and frequently examined issues of these programs has led us to conclude the fact that NSSFC has facilitated the increase in translation studies as an academic discipline in China. Further investigation into the positive relationship between NSSFC funding policies and mechanism and the growth in academic translation studies has also identified the ways NSSFC boosts translation studies as an academic discipline in China: to promote and increase the market, interdisciplinary, and multimodal applicability of the research output. The findings also suggest that revisions may be needed to further refine the NSSFC mechanism so that translation studies will develop into a balanced, continuously innovative discipline.

The state of dispositional mindfulness research

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Alfons Karl ◽  
Ronald Fischer
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Trait Mindfulness ◽  
Dispositional Mindfulness ◽  
Research Topics ◽  
Network Analyses ◽  
Research Fields ◽  
Bibliometric Review ◽  
The Difference

Objectives We present a bibliometric review of research on trait mindfulness published from 2005 till 2021 to determine the current state of the field and identify research trajectories. Methods A search conducted on Jan 30, 2021 using the search terms “trait mindfulness” OR “dispositional mindfulness” in the Web of Science Core Collection identified 1,229 documents. Results Using keyword-based network analyses, the various clusters suggested two major approaches in the field, one focusing on cognitive attentional processes, and a second approach that encompasses a wider field of well-being and clinical research topics. We also increasing consolidation of research fields over time, with research on wider individual differences such as personality being subsumed into clinically and wellbeing-oriented research topics. More recently, a distinct theme focused on the validity of measurement of mindfulness emerged. In addition to general patterns in the field, we examined the global distribution of trait mindfulness research. Research output was substantially skewed towards North American-based researchers with less international collaborations. Chinese researchers nevertheless also produced research at significant rates. Comparing the difference in research topics between China and the US-based researchers we found substantial differences with US research emphasizing meditation and substance abuse issues, whereas researchers from China focused on methodological questions. Conclusions Overall, our review indicates that research on trait mindfulness might profit from conceptual and cultural realignment, with greater focus on individual differences research in other areas of psychology to complement the strong clinical and cognitive focus we well as also stronger cross-cultural and comparative studies.

scholarly journals Research output and the public health burden of cancer: is there any relationship?

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 75 ◽  
Author(s):  
F.M. Patafio ◽  
S.C. Brooks ◽  
X. Wei ◽  
Y. Peng ◽  
J. Biagi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cancer Mortality ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Cancer Site ◽  
Relative Distribution ◽  
Public Health Burden ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Burden

Purpose The relative distribution of research output across cancer sites is not well described. Here, we evaluate whether the volume of published research is proportional to the public health burden of individual cancers. We also explore whether research output is proportional to research funding.Methods Statistics from the Canadian and American cancer societies were used to identify the top ten causes of cancer death in 2013. All journal articles and clinical trials published in 2013 by Canadian or U.S. authors for those cancers were identified. Total research funding in Canada by cancer site was obtained from the Canadian Cancer Research Alliance. Descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation coefficients were used to describe the relationship between research output, cancer mortality, and research funding.Results We identified 19,361 publications and 2661 clinical trials. The proportion of publications and clinical trials was substantially lower than the proportion of deaths for lung (41% deaths, 15% publications, 16% clinical trials), colorectal (14%, 7%, 6%), pancreatic (10%, 7%, 5%), and gastroesophageal (7%, 5%, 3%) cancers. Conversely, research output was substantially greater than the proportion of deaths for breast cancer (10% deaths, 29% publications, 30% clinical trials) and prostate cancer (8%, 15%, 17%). We observed a stronger correlation between research output and funding (publications r = 0.894, p < 0.001; clinical trials r = 0.923, p < 0.001) than between research output and cancer mortality (r = 0.363, p = 0.303; r = 0.340, p = 0.337).Conclusions Research output is not well correlated with the public health burden of individual cancers, but is correlated with the relative level of research funding.

scholarly journals Mandated Research Peer Review Positively Impacts Research Funding Success Rates for Young Investigators

2019 ◽  
Vol 210 ◽  
pp. 3-4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerie P. Opipari ◽  
Julie C. Lumeng ◽  
Becky Youmans ◽  
Faye Silverstein
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Funding Success

A systematic investigation on the research publications that have used the medical expenditure panel survey (MEPS) data through a bibliometrics approach

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 705-721
Author(s):  
Jiacheng Liu ◽  
Fei Yu ◽  
Lixin Song
Keyword(s):  
Medical Expenditure Panel Survey ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Healthcare Services ◽  
Research Area ◽  
Systematic Investigation ◽  
Healthcare Research ◽  
Medical Expenditure ◽  
Panel Survey ◽  
Research Topics ◽  
Content Type

PurposeThis study aimed to examine how Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) data have been used to support scientific discoveries in biomedical and health sciences, and provide insight to researchers who are interested in using MEPS regarding collaborations and dissemination of research output.Design/methodology/approachA bibliometric approach was used to systematically examine the publications that used MEPS data and were indexed by PubMed and Web of Science (WoS). Microsoft Excel and bibliometric tools (WoS and VOSviewer) were utilized for quantitative and bibliometric network analysis. The measures were investigated on the total number of publications by year, research categories, source journals, other datasets/databases co-used with MEPS, funding sources, collaboration patterns, and research topics.FindingsA total of 1,953 eligible publications were included in this study with the numbers growing significantly over time. MEPS data were primarily used in healthcare services, public environmental and occupational health research. The journals that published the most papers using MEPS were all in the healthcare research area. Twenty-four other databases were found to be used along with MEPS. Over 3,200 researchers from 1,074 institutions in 25 countries have contributed to the publications. Research funding was supported from federal, private, local, and international agencies. Three clusters of research topics were identified among 235 key terms extracted from titles and abstracts.Originality/valueOur results illustrated the broad landscape of the research efforts that MEPS data have supported and substantiated the value of AHRQ's effort of providing MEPS to the public.

scholarly journals Gender contributes to personal research funding success in The Netherlands

2015 ◽  
Vol 112 (40) ◽  
pp. 12349-12353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Romy van der Lee ◽  
Naomi Ellemers
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Women In Academia ◽  
Scientific Disciplines ◽  
Funding Success ◽  
Underrepresentation Of Women ◽  
Personal Research

We examined the application and review materials of three calls (n= 2,823) of a prestigious grant for personal research funding in a national full population of early career scientists awarded by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO). Results showed evidence of gender bias in application evaluations and success rates, as well as in language use in instructions and evaluation sheets. Male applicants received significantly more competitive “quality of researcher” evaluations (but not “quality of proposal” evaluations) and had significantly higher application success rates than female applicants. Gender disparities were most prevalent in scientific disciplines with the highest number of applications and with equal gender distribution among the applicants (i.e., life sciences and social sciences). Moreover, content analyses of the instructional and evaluation materials revealed the use of gendered language favoring male applicants. Overall, our data reveal a 4% “loss” of women during the grant review procedure, and illustrate the perpetuation of the funding gap, which contributes to the underrepresentation of women in academia.

scholarly journals Analyzing Funding Patterns and Their Evolution in Two Medical Research Topics

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (02) ◽  
pp. 1740010
Author(s):  
Blanca De-Miguel-Molina ◽  
Scott W. Cunningham ◽  
Fernando Palop
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Medical Research ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Medical Subject Headings ◽  
Research Topics ◽  
Breast And Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Policy Goals ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
Cross National

This paper analyzes funding patterns and their evolution in two medical research topics: breast cancer and ovarian cancer, taking into account cross-agency and cross-national co-funding. A bibliometric analysis of 355[Formula: see text]463 papers from PubMed (273[Formula: see text]526 on breast cancer and 81[Formula: see text]937 on ovarian cancer) brought back 91 funding agencies involved in breast cancer and 65 in ovarian cancer. Additionally, the paper examined the evolution of medical subject headings (MESH) funded by agencies. An analysis of patterns in funding, co-funding, MESH, and their evolution, was carried out using social network analysis (SNA) methodology. The results show the importance of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) in both breast and ovarian cancer. The NCI achieves its policy goals by co-funding its programs with both national and cross-national agencies. Moreover, the MESH agencies co-funded in the two years studied coincided; however, it must be said that the number of agencies which participated in research funding also increased.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document