A Case Western Reserve University professor wondered why some types of research were more apt to secure federal grants, while others—especially exploratory science—often didn’t.
Using the National Institutes of Health (NIH) as a case study, Assistant Philosophy Professor Chris Haufe concluded that hypothesis-based research has the edge over discovery research for several reasons that he explains in a new paper.
Haufe discusses the NIH’s peer-reviewed grant process in his Studies in History and Philosophy of Science journal article, “Why do funding agencies favor hypothesis testing?”
Hypothesis-driven research is based on scientific theories, while exploration is based on a search for discovery backed by few theories or none at all.
While looking into the types of research most often funded, Haufe shows that instructions to reviewers and applicants strongly favor hypothesis-based inquiries that are related to and relevant to current science issues.
For example, Haufe reports that the NIH guidelines for RO1 grants (described by the NIH as investigator-initiated or a response to a program announcement or request for application) to researchers advise applicants, “A strong grant application is driven by a strong, solid hypothesis with clear research objectives. The specific aims are a formal statement of objectives and milestones of the research project towards testing the hypothesis.”
The article offers two explanations why the NIH prefers hypothesis testing: The research is driven by best practices (how to do and test science), and it’s easy for peer reviewers to separate good from bad science based on the research methods.
Those with a realistic chance to prove what they set out to find and have the biggest impact for the public’s benefit tend to receive the federal research dollars, Haufe concludes.
With hypothesis testing, researchers present what the study hopes to accomplish, how it will be done and possible outcomes. Many researchers also conduct pilot studies or draw from findings by other researchers to build a strong case for future success.
Exploratory research, however, is driven more by hope and chance of discovery, Haufe writes.
Funding success also tends to take the path of least risk, Haufe explains.
Hypothesis testing takes the next step in scientific theory, having already stood the rigors of examination. Meanwhile, exploratory research examines unknown areas with no or little-known theories to back them—perceived as a riskier bet.
Haufe said the federal government, with limited funding, wants to support research where there’s a chance of success that serves both public and science interests. The closer the research is to what’s already known also improves chances of funding, he reports.
The science community has long accepted hypothesis testing.
The Latest on: Exploratory funding
- One solution to the current austim funding crisis on February 26, 2019 at 2:46 pm
While these particular models may not be the solution for all children and families, the resource efficiency of parent-mediated models makes this an appealing approach worthy of further investment and ... […]
- Funding the nation’s maritime disputes; GNPC or Petroleum Fund on February 26, 2019 at 1:57 pm
It is clear that GNPC’s mandate under PNDC Law 64 of 1983, (now PNDC Act 64) is to undertake the exploration, development, production and disposal of petroleum in the country. The objectives of the Co... […]
- What should be Japan’s strategy for human space exploration? on February 26, 2019 at 1:51 am
If human space exploration requires more funding, academia recognizes that the budget for other areas, including space science, are forced to decrease. This results in a neglect by academia to human s... […]
- Golden Predator announces 2019 exploration program at the 3 aces project, Yukon on February 25, 2019 at 10:41 pm
Bulk sampling is expected to enable the 2019 3 Aces exploration program to be self-funding. • Expand the Company's knowledge and understanding of the primary and secondary controls of ... […]
- New Age Exploration in trading halt with a material funding update pending on February 25, 2019 at 4:00 pm
New Age Exploration Limited (ASX:NAE) is in a trading halt pending an announcement in connection with a material funding update. The ASX has granted the halt which will remain in place until the start ... […]
- Chinese government funding may have been used for ‘CRISPR babies’ project, documents suggest on February 25, 2019 at 1:39 am
the Shenzhen Science and Technology Innovation Free Exploration Project, a program funded by the Shenzhen innovation commission. It makes no mention of the science ministry or Southern University of S... […]
- Baringo geothermal project gets Sh1.3 billion funding boost on February 24, 2019 at 1:06 pm
SEE ALSO :Residents now want governor impeached Representatives of the facility said they had reviewed GDC’s application, which had met all the requirements for funding ... in greenfields and initial ... […]
- Uptick Newswire Hosts Seafarer Exploration on The Stock Day Podcast to Discuss the Company’s Expansion on February 21, 2019 at 5:30 am
Milstead began the interview by explaining how he got involved with Seafarer Exploration. Originally Milstead started with the Company by providing funding and serving as an advisor. Now Milstead ... […]
- Here's How A National Space Lottery Might Solve NASA's Funding Problems on February 20, 2019 at 11:36 pm
even renaissance in space exploration, I’m not wholly convinced. The space-faring and astronomical research communities can no longer wholly rely on funding from Congress --- which seems to continuall... […]
- SA govt’s AEMFC to pump R1bn into Optimum Coal after winning interim funding bid on February 20, 2019 at 5:47 am
AFRICAN Exploration & Mining Finance Company (AEMFC), a company ... accepted the firm’s post-commencement funding (PCF) of some R1bn. This means AEMFC, which is housed in the government’s Central Ener... […]
via Google News and Bing News