Trust and Funding Science by Lottery

Jamie Shaw ()
Additional contact information
Jamie Shaw: Leibniz Universität Hannover, Institut für Philosophie

A chapter in The Science and Art of Simulation, 2024, pp 173-185 from Springer

Abstract: Abstract Commentators have recently proposed novel modifications of traditional peer review as a method of evaluating grant proposals. One that has gained increased attention is introducing lotteries, or elements of random chance, into funding allocation methods. The primary arguments for the use of lotteries concerns its purported cost efficiency, openness to innovative research, and ability to minimize the marginalization of particular groups through traditional peer review. Considerations of trust are nearly entirely absent from the discussion, although they are extremely important when considering practical implementations. The purpose of this paper is to outline a series of plausible hypotheses about how lotteries may impact the trust of various publics and scientists that could be subjected to tests. This provides the beginnings of a research program for analyzing the relationship between lotteries in science funding policy and trust.

Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:sprchp:978-3-031-68058-8_12

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/9783031680588

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-68058-8_12

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in Springer Books from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().