Abstract
Concern that the selection of research projects by peer review disfavors risky science has called attention to ways to incorporate risk into the evaluation of research proposals. This discussion often occurs in the absence of well-defined and developed concepts of what risk and uncertainty mean in science. This paper sets out to address this void with the goal of providing building blocks to further the discussion of the meaning of risk and uncertainty in science. The core contributions of the paper are fourfold. First, we outline the meaning of risk in science, drawing on insights from literatures on risk and uncertainty. Second, based on this outline, we discuss possible ways in which programs can embrace a more comprehensive concept of risk and embed it in peer review of proposals, with the goal of not penalizing risky research proposals with the potential of high return when funding decisions are made. Third, we make an important distinction between research projects involving high-risk and research projects whose evaluation is subjected to ambiguity/radical uncertainty. Fourth, we discuss possible ways of addressing ambiguity/radical uncertainty by funding agencies.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: 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.