Om episode
In this first episode of a six-part weekly series about funding, Julie Gould outlines the US National Institutes of Health's (NIH) grant review process and the extent to which reviewers evaluating the same applications agree or disagree. Is the current system the best way, she asks Elizabeth Pier, lead author of a March 2018 paper published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Low agreement among reviewers evaluating the same NIH grant applications.Paid contentThis episode concludes with a slot sponsored by the European Research Council. Jean-Pierre Bourguignon, its president, outlines the organisation's role and remit as a grant funder. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Nyeste episoder
Working Scientist
How studying octopus nurseries can shape the future of our oceans
2024-09-19 • 31min
Working Scientist
How we slashed our lab’s carbon footprint
2024-09-12 • 24min
Working Scientist
Meet the retired scientists who collaborate with younger colleagues
2024-07-26 • 19min
Working Scientist
A dumpster full of mercury and other things to avoid: lab closures made simple
2024-07-22 • 23min
Working Scientist
Pension planning and psychosocial support: how institutions can help academics at the late career stage
2024-07-12 • 23min
Working Scientist
“Who am I if not a scientist?” How to find identity and purpose in retirement
2024-07-05 • 19min
Working Scientist
Choose your own adventure: navigating retirement after an academic career
2024-07-01 • 20min
Working Scientist
The last few miles: how to prepare for the late-career stage in science
2024-06-21 • 10min
Working Scientist
Counting the cost of fashion’s carbon footprint
2024-06-10 • 22min
Working Scientist
Why female students at an inner London school are seeing scientists in a different light
2024-06-06 • 17min