@GillesvanWezel As the man one said, "Belief's got nothing to do with it". I'm happy your system has worked for you. But, on average, you're demonstrably incorrect. This isn't based on my opinion, it's based on data. https://t.co/nEzAUZ6Iuk https://t.co
@rweichselbaum @wenjiang_nano @NiuSanford @GitaSuneja @DrMalikaSiker @raymailhotvega @TaniguchiMD @BK_radiation @MKnoll_MD @subatomicdoc @fumikochino Itโs all about the grant churn! See: https://t.co/7wp1xMH2Vy https://t.co/NR8xrNBs2E
RT @EloquentScience: Other resources discussing the number of reviewers and decision making: Are three heads better than two? How the numbโฆ
RT @EloquentScience: Other resources discussing the number of reviewers and decision making: Are three heads better than two? How the numbโฆ
Other resources discussing the number of reviewers and decision making: Are three heads better than two? How the number of reviewers and editor behavior affect the rejection rate https://t.co/kQKBrJdJ6Z Peer Review, Program Officers and Science Funding h
#modeling #peerreview: Relationship of proposal submissions, #funding rates, review & proposal quality & quantity. http://t.co/0PaV9RsRiE
Available Budget <15%? The most effective strategy for scientists to maintain funding is to submit many proposals. http://t.co/mdWyHab9wz
#PLoS: Peer Review, Program Officers and Science Funding http://t.co/8PhIXtxG