首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Research Integrity and Peer Review >‘Are you siding with a personality or the grant proposal?’: observations on how peer review panels function
【2h】

‘Are you siding with a personality or the grant proposal?’: observations on how peer review panels function

机译:‘您是个性还是资助提议者?’:关于同行评审小组运作方式的观察

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

BackgroundIn Australia, the peer review process for competitive funding is usually conducted by a peer review group in conjunction with prior assessment from external assessors. This process is quite mysterious to those outside it. The purpose of this research was to throw light on grant review panels (sometimes called the ‘black box’) through an examination of the impact of panel procedures, panel composition and panel dynamics on the decision-making in the grant review process. A further purpose was to compare experience of a simplified review process with more conventional processes used in assessing grant proposals in Australia.
机译:背景技术在澳大利亚,竞争性资金的同行评审过程通常由同行评审小组结合外部评估者的事先评估进行。这个过程对于它之外的人来说是相当神秘的。这项研究的目的是通过审查小组程序,小组组成和小组动态对拨款审查过程中的决策的影响,来揭露拨款审查小组(有时称为“黑匣子”)的重要性。另一个目的是将简化审查流程的经验与评估澳大利亚赠款提案时使用的更常规的流程进行比较。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号