Improving Grant Peer Review within a Science of Science Funding

ImPROGRESS is a groundbreaking study of Economics of Science that will build a science-of-science approach to grant Peer Review (PR). ImPROGRESS undertakes an investigation about the choices of PR design that increase the accuracy (= predictive validity) of funding decisions with the aim to provide science-based insights on which designs of the grant PR improve the funding of research and the progress of science and society. ImPROGRESS will provide causal predictions concerning which designs of grant PR (which reviewers, how many, which protocols/criteria, which aggregation/deliberation method) lead to more accurate funding decisions.

The following white papers have been commissioned as part of this research project:

Valentina Tartari, Copenhagen Business School, DK and Christos Kolympiris, Warwick Business School, UK
Peer review for science funding: a review

Donna K. Ginther, University of Kansas and NBER
Gender, Race/Ethnicity and Research Funding

Luigi Buzzacchi, Politecnico di Torino
Combining Portfolios of Risky Research Projects within a Science of Science Funding