PhilSci Archive

The modified lottery: Formalizing the intrinsic randomness of research funding

De Peuter, Steven and Conix, Stijn (2021) The modified lottery: Formalizing the intrinsic randomness of research funding. Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance.

This is the latest version of this item.

[img] Text
!De Peuter Conix Randomness Accepted Version.docx

Download (77kB)

Abstract

Competition for research funds has, in the recent decade, become hypercompetitive. Commonly, to determine which proposals receive funding, a system of peer review is used, which is broadly accepted, easily understood, and broadly trusted among researchers. It is often considered the best system in use, but it suffers from important shortcomings, and adaptations to overcome these shortcomings have small and often short-lived effects. Hence, the preference for peer review does not mean it necessarily outperforms all other systems. In fact, it is time for an open discussion about alternative allocation mechanisms. Random allocation of research funding may be a viable alternative to the current peer review system. In particular the “organized randomness” of a modified lottery is interesting, combining the benefits of randomization with some of the most valuable aspects of peer review. Still, many questions remain and this is certainly not a plea to allocate all research funds using lotteries without further research. But we need to be prepared to consider alternatives, even though they are not perfect, and modified lotteries should be part of the solution.


Export/Citation: EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL
Social Networking:
Share |

Item Type: Published Article or Volume
Creators:
CreatorsEmailORCID
De Peuter, Stevensteven.depeuter@kuleuven.be0000-0003-4137-4431
Conix, Stijnstijn.conix@kuleuven.be0000-0002-1487-0213
Keywords: Grant peer review, lottery, randomness, research funding, research integrity
Subjects: General Issues > Ethical Issues
General Issues > Science and Policy
Depositing User: Dr. Steven De Peuter
Date Deposited: 21 May 2021 02:13
Last Modified: 21 May 2021 02:13
Item ID: 19064
Journal or Publication Title: Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
DOI or Unique Handle: https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2021.1927727
Subjects: General Issues > Ethical Issues
General Issues > Science and Policy
Date: 7 May 2021
URI: https://philsci-archive-dev.library.pitt.edu/id/eprint/19064

Available Versions of this Item

Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Altmetric.com

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item