Science rules! A qualitative study of scientists’ approaches to grant lottery | Research Evaluation | Oxford Academic

Axel Philipps, Science rules! A qualitative study of scientists’ approaches to grant lottery, Research Evaluation, Volume 30, Issue 1, January 2021, Pages 102–111, https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvaa027 Using peer review to assess the validity of research proposals has always had its fair share of critics, including a more-than-fair-share of scholars. The debate about this method of assessing these proposals now seems trivial when compared with assessing the validity for granting funding by lottery. Some of the same scholars have suggested that the way grant lottery was being assessed has made random allocation seem even-handed, less biased and more supportive of innovative research. But we know little of what researchers actually think about grant lottery and even less about the thoughts of those scientists who rely on funding. This paper examines scientists’ perspectives on selecting grants by ‘lots’ and how they justify their support or opposition. How do they approach something s

Axel Philipps, Science rules! A qualitative study of scientists’ approaches to grant lottery, Research Evaluation, Volume 30, Issue 1, January 2021, Pages 102–111, https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvaa027 Using peer review to assess the validity of research proposals has always had its fair share of critics, including a more-than-fair-share of scholars. The debate about this method of assessing these proposals now seems trivial when compared with assessing the validity for granting funding by lottery. Some of the same scholars have suggested that the way grant lottery was being assessed has mad