Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 3, 2025

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
Published on: January 12, 2018
Grant writing and grant peer review as questionable research practices
Stijn Conix1, Andreas De Block1, Krist Vaesen2
1Centre for Logic and Philosophy of Science, KU Leuven, Leuven, Vlaams Brabant, 3000, Belgium.
Abstract:
A large part of governmental research funding is currently distributed through the peer review of project proposals. In this paper, we argue that such funding systems incentivize and even force researchers to violate five moral values, each of which is central to commonly used scientific codes of conduct. Our argument complements existing epistemic arguments against peer-review project funding systems and, accordingly, strengthens the mounting calls for reform of these systems.
Related Concept Videos
Ethics in Research
Bias
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...
Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care...
The Scientific Method
Generally, predictions are tested using carefully-designed experiments. Based on the outcome of these...
Archival Research
Proofreading

