Federal peer review may be overstretched and error prone

January 10, 2011, University of South Florida

The federal peer review system, by which research proposals are judged worthy for funding, may be "over stretched" and "susceptible to error," said Elmer Yglesias, a researcher at the Science and Technology Policy Institute and author of "Improving Peer Review in the Federal Government," published in the current issue of TECHNOLOGY & INNOVATION, Proceedings of the National Academy of Inventors.

According to Yglesias, the federal peer review system is awash in an increasing number of funding proposals, leaving him to wonder if the peer review system is up to the challenge.

"Indications are that the system is over stretched," said Yglesias. "In addition, the number of U.S. researchers qualified to perform these reviews is not only limited, but declining as well. With fewer reviewers, funding decisions are more susceptible to error."

Not unlike a systematic check might be instituted for an engineering quality issue, Yglesias recommends a system of "calibration" to mitigate undesired outcomes. Calibration, he suggested, might prevent three kinds of errors: errors occurring because a proposal is selected for funding when it should not have been because of the reviewers failing to get good instructions and, second, errors occurring because reviewers were biased and swayed the panel. A third kind of error comes from over confident reviewers.

"This error occurs because some reviewers are correct far less than they think," commented Yglesias.

For Yglesias, the peer review system can be improved and validated through "calibration," which he defines as the use of specific measurement techniques compared to a standard. Providing standard examples to reviewers and running mock reviews would help, he added.

"Unfortunately, not many program officers are trained to facilitate a calibration," said Yglesias. "Also, it requires extra time and resources."

For a calibration program, he recommends "Calibrated Peer Review", a web-based program developed at UCLA through which student writing assignments are graded by student peers.

"It would not be difficult to conceive a similar system to calibrate the review of scientific proposals," he concluded.

More information: http://www.cognizantcommunication.com/filecabinet/Technology/techinnovation.html

Related Stories

Recommended for you

Folate deficiency creates hitherto unknown problems in connection with cell division

December 17, 2018
Folate deficiency creates more problems in connection with DNA replication than researchers had hitherto assumed, researchers from the University of Copenhagen show in a new study. Once a person lacks folate, the damage caused ...

Babies and toddlers at greater risk from second-hand smoke than previously thought, study finds

December 16, 2018
Infants and toddlers in low-income communities may be even more at risk from second- and third-hand smoke exposure than has been believed, according to new federally supported research.

A co-worker's rudeness can affect your sleep—and your partner's, study finds

December 14, 2018
Rudeness. Sarcastic comments. Demeaning language. Interrupting or talking over someone in a meeting. Workplace incivilities such as these are becoming increasingly common, and a new study from Portland State University and ...

Study shows magnesium optimizes vitamin D status

December 14, 2018
A randomized trial by Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center researchers indicates that magnesium optimizes vitamin D status, raising it in people with deficient levels and lowering it in people with high levels.

A holiday gift to primary care doctors: Proof of their time crunch

December 14, 2018
The average primary care doctor needs to work six more hours a day than they already do, in order to make sure their patients get all the preventive and early-detection care they want and deserve, a new study finds.

Teens get more sleep with later school start time, researchers find

December 12, 2018
When Seattle Public Schools announced that it would reorganize school start times across the district for the fall of 2016, the massive undertaking took more than a year to deploy. Elementary schools started earlier, while ...

1 comment

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

geokstr
1 / 5 (1) Jan 10, 2011
The federal peer review system, by which research proposals are judged worthy for funding, may be "over stretched" and "susceptible to error,"...

Maybe. MAYBE???

HaHaHaHahaHa

Just perhaps it's because the never-ending, bottomless pit of taxpayer and borrowed dollars is a tempting target for "intellectuals", "professors", "economists" and lawyers. And with faceless, unelected bureaucrats determining who gets how much, is it any wonder that projects that "prove" the politically correct, like AGW, or white racism, or will reflect negatively on business and the free market, get tons of funding, and none go to the opposing views (plus of course the billions we spend building white elephants named after congresscritters.)

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.