Abstract
Basic scientific research generates knowledge that has intrinsic value which is independent of future applications. Basic research may also lead to practical benefits, such as a new drug or diagnostic method. Building on our previous study of basic biomedical and biological researchers at Harvard, we present findings from a new survey of similar scientists from three countries. This survey asked about the scientists' motivations, goals and perspectives along with their attitudes concerning policies designed to increase both the practical (i.e. public health) benefits of basic research as well as their own personal satisfaction. Close to 900 basic investigators responded to the survey; results corroborate the main findings from the previous survey of Harvard scientists. In addition, we find that most bioscientists disfavor present policies that require a discussion of the public health potential of their proposals in grants but generally favor softer policies aimed at increasing the quality of work and the potential practical benefits of basic research. In particular, bioscientists are generally supportive of those policies entailing the organization of more meetings between scientists and the general public, the organization of more academic discussion about the role of scientists in the society, and the implementation of a "basic bibliography" for each new approved drug.
Highlights
Basic research has been crucial for the improvement of the human condition, including both research inspired solely by scientific curiosity and research driven by a vision of future applications
The results show that most of basic scientists believe that some degree of assessment of the health benefit potential of basic biological or biomedical research is possible but that the current policy requiring the discussion of this potential in written research proposals is not very effective and should be eliminated for at least a portion of the grants, if not most or all of them
There is a positive correlation between involvement in basic research and the importance of motivation from “pure advancement of knowledge,” “satisfaction of curiosity,” and “satisfaction from solving puzzling problems.”
Summary
Basic research has been crucial for the improvement of the human condition, including both research inspired solely by scientific curiosity and research driven by a vision of future applications. While basic knowledge is inherently valuable, all basic knowledge does not have the same potential for practical benefits. It is often difficult a priori as well as a posteriori to determine which knowledge will have, or has had, a greater impact on society, and some knowledge may never have any utility, neither direct nor indirect, in producing any practical outcome. We focused on policies based on soft incentives (what behavioral economists call “nudges”) because we believed that, if properly tailored to basic scientists motivations and goals, soft policies could effectively stir (some) basic scientists towards research with a greater potential of creating larger public health benefits without overly constraining their research or decreasing their work satisfaction
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
