To Apply or Not to Apply: A Survey Analysis of Grant Writing Costs and Benefits
Author
Abstract
Suggested Citation
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118494
Download full text from publisher
References listed on IDEAS
- Michael R Martin & Andrea Kopstein & Joy M Janice, 2010. "An Analysis of Preliminary and Post-Discussion Priority Scores for Grant Applications Peer Reviewed by the Center for Scientific Review at the NIH," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(11), pages 1-6, November.
- repec:mpr:mprres:3283 is not listed on IDEAS
Citations
Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
Cited by:
- Marco Ottaviani, 2020.
"Grantmaking,"
Working Papers
672, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
- Ottaviani, Marco, 2020. "Grantmaking," CEPR Discussion Papers 15389, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Cindy Sing-Bik Ngai & Rita Gill Singh, 2020. "Relationship between persuasive metadiscoursal devices in research article abstracts and their attention on social media," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-25, April.
- Christoph Carnehl & Marco Ottaviani & Justus Preusser, 2024. "Designing Scientific Grants," Papers 2410.12356, arXiv.org.
- Christoph Carnehl & Marco Ottaviani & Justus Preusser, 2024.
"Designing Scientific Grants,"
NBER Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship and Innovation Policy and the Economy, volume 4,
National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Christoph Carnehl & Marco Ottaviani & Justus Preusser, 2024. "Designing Scientific Grants," NBER Working Papers 32668, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Gerald Schweiger & Adrian Barnett & Peter van den Besselaar & Lutz Bornmann & Andreas De Block & John P. A. Ioannidis & Ulf Sandstrom & Stijn Conix, 2024. "The Costs of Competition in Distributing Scarce Research Funds," Papers 2403.16934, arXiv.org.
- Kevin W. Boyack & Caleb Smith & Richard Klavans, 2018. "Toward predicting research proposal success," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 449-461, February.
- Jung-Kyu Jung & Jae Young Choi, 2022. "Choice and allocation characteristics of faculty time in Korea: effects of tenure, research performance, and external shock," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2847-2869, May.
- Fong, Eric A. & Wilhite, Allen W., 2021. "The Impact of False Investigators on Grant Funding," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(10).
- Miguel Navascués & Costantino Budroni, 2019. "Theoretical research without projects," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-35, March.
- Marco Cozzi, 2020.
"Public Funding of Research and Grant Proposals in the Social Sciences: Empirical Evidence from Canada,"
Department Discussion Papers
1809, Department of Economics, University of Victoria.
- Marco Cozzi, 2022. "Public Funding of Research and Grant Proposals in the Social Sciences: Empirical Evidence from Canada," Department Discussion Papers 2009, Department of Economics, University of Victoria.
- Gemma Elizabeth Derrick & Alessandra Zimmermann & Helen Greaves & Jonathan Best & Richard Klavans, 2024. "Targeted, actionable and fair: Reviewer reports as feedback and its effect on ECR career choices," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(4), pages 648-657.
Most related items
These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.- Stephen A Gallo & Afton S Carpenter & Scott R Glisson, 2013. "Teleconference versus Face-to-Face Scientific Peer Review of Grant Application: Effects on Review Outcomes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(8), pages 1-9, August.
- David G Pina & Darko Hren & Ana Marušić, 2015. "Peer Review Evaluation Process of Marie Curie Actions under EU’s Seventh Framework Programme for Research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-15, June.
- Elena A. Erosheva & Patrícia Martinková & Carole J. Lee, 2021. "When zero may not be zero: A cautionary note on the use of inter‐rater reliability in evaluating grant peer review," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 184(3), pages 904-919, July.
- Miriam L E Steiner Davis & Tiffani R Conner & Kate Miller-Bains & Leslie Shapard, 2020. "What makes an effective grants peer reviewer? An exploratory study of the necessary skills," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-22, May.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0118494. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.