2152424
Project Grant
Overview
Grant Description
NSF PD 19-125Y - Science of Science: Discovery, Communication, and Impact (SOS:DCI) - Randomized Control Trial of the Registered Reports Publishing Format.
The Registered Reports (RR) publishing model could be transformative to how research is conducted, peer reviewed, and published. RRs could alter incentives for researchers toward focusing on asking important questions and using strong methodology to test those questions, and away from the demand for exciting, provocative results whatever their credibility. Ultimately, RRs can improve the quality of peer review and scholarly communication, thus improving the rigor, transparency, and reproducibility of research.
Large-scale adoption of RRs could fundamentally change how research is evaluated and communicated. In a RR, authors submit a paper detailing the research question and proposed methodology to test the question prior to observing the study outcomes. In the first stage of peer review, reviewers assess the importance of the question and the quality of the methodology proposed to investigate it. If the paper passes this stage of peer review, the authors receive "in-principle acceptance" meaning that the journal commits to publishing the paper regardless of outcomes as long as the authors follow through with competent execution and reporting of the research.
The second stage of peer review, after the results are known and added to the paper, assesses adherence to the original commitments, clarity of the distinction between planned and unplanned analyses, and accuracy of interpretation of findings, and not whether the results are positive, interesting, or consistent with hypotheses.
Given the potentially transformative impact of RRs on the research process, it is essential to conduct a randomized trial to evaluate the model's qualities. By collaborating with journals, we will conduct a randomized trial of RRs in an ecologically valid context.
This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.
The Registered Reports (RR) publishing model could be transformative to how research is conducted, peer reviewed, and published. RRs could alter incentives for researchers toward focusing on asking important questions and using strong methodology to test those questions, and away from the demand for exciting, provocative results whatever their credibility. Ultimately, RRs can improve the quality of peer review and scholarly communication, thus improving the rigor, transparency, and reproducibility of research.
Large-scale adoption of RRs could fundamentally change how research is evaluated and communicated. In a RR, authors submit a paper detailing the research question and proposed methodology to test the question prior to observing the study outcomes. In the first stage of peer review, reviewers assess the importance of the question and the quality of the methodology proposed to investigate it. If the paper passes this stage of peer review, the authors receive "in-principle acceptance" meaning that the journal commits to publishing the paper regardless of outcomes as long as the authors follow through with competent execution and reporting of the research.
The second stage of peer review, after the results are known and added to the paper, assesses adherence to the original commitments, clarity of the distinction between planned and unplanned analyses, and accuracy of interpretation of findings, and not whether the results are positive, interesting, or consistent with hypotheses.
Given the potentially transformative impact of RRs on the research process, it is essential to conduct a randomized trial to evaluate the model's qualities. By collaborating with journals, we will conduct a randomized trial of RRs in an ecologically valid context.
This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.
Awardee
Funding Goals
THE GOAL OF THIS PROGRAM IS TO SUPPORT RESEARCH PROPOSALS SPECIFIC TO "SCIENCE OF SCIENCE: DISCOVERY, COMMUNICATION AND IMPACT
Grant Program (CFDA)
Awarding / Funding Agency
Place of Performance
Charlottesville,
Virginia
22903-5083
United States
Geographic Scope
Single Zip Code
Related Opportunity
Analysis Notes
Amendment Since initial award the total obligations have increased 261% from $207,784 to $750,000.
Center For Open Science was awarded
Project Grant 2152424
worth $750,000
from the Division of Social Behavioral and Economic Science in September 2022 with work to be completed primarily in Charlottesville Virginia United States.
The grant
has a duration of 4 years and
was awarded through assistance program 47.075 Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences.
The Project Grant was awarded through grant opportunity Science of Science: Discovery, Communication, and Impact.
Status
(Ongoing)
Last Modified 8/13/24
Period of Performance
9/1/22
Start Date
8/31/26
End Date
Funding Split
$750.0K
Federal Obligation
$0.0
Non-Federal Obligation
$750.0K
Total Obligated
Activity Timeline
Transaction History
Modifications to 2152424
Additional Detail
Award ID FAIN
2152424
SAI Number
None
Award ID URI
SAI EXEMPT
Awardee Classifications
Private Institution Of Higher Education
Awarding Office
490405 DIV OF SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC SCIENCE
Funding Office
490405 DIV OF SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC SCIENCE
Awardee UEI
N1SSK43FCY13
Awardee CAGE
6ZG21
Performance District
VA-05
Senators
Mark Warner
Timothy Kaine
Timothy Kaine
Budget Funding
Federal Account | Budget Subfunction | Object Class | Total | Percentage |
---|---|---|---|---|
Research and Related Activities, National Science Foundation (049-0100) | General science and basic research | Grants, subsidies, and contributions (41.0) | $482,410 | 100% |
Modified: 8/13/24