Current Science

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

SERB Merit Review Process:Adapting to Emerging Challenges


Affiliations
1 Science and Engineering Research Board, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi 110 070, India
 

Merit review is the most trusted process adopted by funding agencies worldwide for selecting high-quality research proposals. Recently, owing to intense competition, the merit review process has come under pressure necessitating the funding agencies to deliberate on issues associated with it. This article describes the merit review process of the Science and Engineering Research Board, Department of Science and Technology, Government of India, which funds competitive research grants of about 8 billion rupees a year for supporting research in science and engineering. The issues associated with the merit review process and possible suggestions are discussed.

Keywords

Funding Agencies, Merit Review, Research Proposals, Science and Engineering.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Global Research Council, Statement of principles for scientific merit review. https://www.globalresearchcouncil.org/fileadmin/documents/GRC_Publications/gs_principles-English.pdf (accessed on 22 December 2017).

  • Research Councils UK, Managing demand for research funding; http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/efficiency/demand/ (accessed on 22 December 2017).

  • NIH, What are the chances for getting funded, National Institutes of Health; https://nexus.od.nih.gov/all/2015/06/29/what-are-the-chances-of-getting-funded/ (accessed on 22 December 2017).

  • Breuning, M., Backstrom, J., Brannon, J. and Gross, B. I., Reviewer fatigue? Why scholars decline to review their peer’s work. PS: Polit. Sci. Polit., 2015, 48, 595–600.

  • Rethinking grant review. Nature Neurosci., 2008, 11, 119.

  • Powell, K., Research funding: making the cut. Nature, 2010, 467, 383–385.

  • Porter, A. L. and Rossini, F. A., Peer review of interdisciplinary research proposals. Sci. Technol. Hum. Values, 1985, 10, 33–38.

  • Global Research Council, Statement of principles on interdisciplinarity; https://www.globalresearchcouncil.org/fileadmin/documents/GRC_Publications/Statement_of_Principles_on_Interdisciplinarity.pdf (accessed on 22 December 2017).

  • Wenneras, C. and Wold, A., Nepotism and sexism in peer-review. Nature, 1997, 387, 341–343.

  • Bornmann, L. and Daniel, H., Potential sources of bias in research fellowship assessments: effects of university prestige and field of study. Res. Eval., 2006, 15, 209–219.

  • Jayasinghe, U. W., Marsh, H. W. and Bond, N., A multilevel cross-classified modeling approach to peer review of grant proposals: the effects of assessor and researcher attributes on assessor ratings. J. R. Stat. Soc., 2003, 166, 279–300.

  • Spier, R. E., Peer review and innovation. Sci. Eng. Ethics, 2002, 8, 109–112.

  • Alberts, B., Kirschner, M. W., Tighman, S. and Varmus, H., Rescuing US biomedical research from its systemic flaws. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 2014, 111, 5773–5777.

  • Merton, R. K., The Matthew effect in science. Science, 1968, 159, 56–63.

  • van Rooyen, S., Godlee, F., Evans, S., Smith, R. and Black, N., Effect of blinding and unmasking on the quality of peer review: a randomized trial. J. Am. Med. Assoc., 1998, 280, 234–237.

  • Fang, F. C. and Casadevall, A., Research funding: the case for a modified lottery. mBio, 2016, 7, 1–7.

  • Health Research Council of New Zealand: Explorer grants https://gateway.hrc.govt.nz/funding/researcher-initiated-proposals/explorer-grants (accessed on 22 December 2017).

  • Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Councils, Sandpits https://www.epsrc.ac.uk/funding/applicationprocess/routes/network/ideas/whatisasandpit/ (accessed on 22 December 2017).


Abstract Views: 268

PDF Views: 78




  • SERB Merit Review Process:Adapting to Emerging Challenges

Abstract Views: 268  |  PDF Views: 78

Authors

Premila Mohan
Science and Engineering Research Board, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi 110 070, India
Ramasamy Brakaspathy
Science and Engineering Research Board, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi 110 070, India

Abstract


Merit review is the most trusted process adopted by funding agencies worldwide for selecting high-quality research proposals. Recently, owing to intense competition, the merit review process has come under pressure necessitating the funding agencies to deliberate on issues associated with it. This article describes the merit review process of the Science and Engineering Research Board, Department of Science and Technology, Government of India, which funds competitive research grants of about 8 billion rupees a year for supporting research in science and engineering. The issues associated with the merit review process and possible suggestions are discussed.

Keywords


Funding Agencies, Merit Review, Research Proposals, Science and Engineering.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.18520/cs%2Fv114%2Fi09%2F1835-1839