Grant Rant IV

Jan 07 2013 Published by under NIH, Peer Review

A comment I made about grants being "saved" in discussion reminded me of one of the first experiences I had on study section in this regard. I can't go into too many details but suffice it to say I battered a couple of cultural memes/expectations about scoring within a particular study section at a time when I was still on the earlier side of my independent career.

I hadn't really paid too much attention to the PI or the project, save a notice when the name turned up on a study section roster. Today I took the trouble to wander over to RePORTER and check up on the Results tab for the grant.

That grant and the PI have exhibited excellent productivity ever since I fought for it.

I love being right.

10 responses so far

  • Genomic Repairman says:

    Fuck it, out em! Who deserves to pay tribute to DrugMonkey?

  • hidde ploegh says:

    as if we hadn't noticed

  • whimple says:

    Especially since the productivity of the lab that didn't get funded because this one did would have totally sucked ass!

  • pgozinia says:

    Hint.....one's status in the field is usually inversely proportional to the amount they blab about their study section servic.
    ACT LIKE YOUBELONG THERE

  • Yes, this blogge thatte is specifically intended in large part to explain to people who have never served on a study section how it works and thereby demystify the process should stoppe blabbeing about it.

  • DrugMonkey says:

    People funded by the NIH who disdain study section service are free-riding assholes.

  • DrugMonkey says:

    GR- you will notice I am not discussing the many times I *failed* to save a grant I thought was great.

  • eeke says:

    "That grant and the PI have exhibited excellent productivity ever since I fought for it."

    This is true for most of us; I can't believe that your guy extra special. The money helps. No money, no productivity. I wish study sections would take this into account when they see grant applications from people who have not yet had any major funding.

  • DrugMonkey says:

    Not all awards result in excellent productivity. But it is certainly true that not having a grant hampers productivity.

    Were I the Boss of Science*, one good plan would be to get noob Asst Profs real funding in the first year or two. Then let the second grant / renewal phase coincide with the tenure phase. If they've produced, great! If not, buh-bye.

    *and more of a hardass than I actually am

  • [...] is not to brag and I don't think this is unusual at all. This comment is to further reinforce my assertions that questioning the ability of a newly [...]

Leave a Reply