Skip to main content

Verified by Psychology Today

Health

The Rigor and Relevance of Science-Funding Decisions

Stable investment in science is essential for addressing national challenges.

Key points

  • Federal science funding is careful and rigorous.
  • Science is necessary for innovation, and instability interrupts scientific discovery.

The unsettled and dynamic pause in federal grants ordered recently has a wide swath of consequences. Each consequence deserves attention; we focus here on science funding.

Consider the critical questions: What therapies best treat adolescent depression? Which medications prevent heart attacks in elderly patients? How can artificial intelligence improve decision-making? How do we cure cancer? Each of these challenges demands rigorous research—made possible through an equally rigorous federal funding process.

Researchers begin by earning relevant expertise through years of advanced education and training opportunities such as medical school or graduate school. This unique expertise, together with individual scholars’ creativity and passion, helps them develop ideas and innovations. Alternatively, federal agencies themselves can issue calls for proposals that target specific needs; for example, many agencies issued calls for proposals related to COVID-19 to help the U.S. respond to the pandemic.

Ideas are often piloted in multiple small-scale experiments or studies. Only when these initial studies show promise, scientists write detailed proposals to request funding to support larger-scale tests. These proposals are extremely detailed, with specific hypotheses and methods. Any funds that are requested must be explained and justified in detail. It can take many months to put together a funding proposal of this nature.

Then, federal agencies with expertise in the specific topics of focus recruit relevant experts, typically three or more other scientists, to review these proposals meticulously in writing. A separate panel of experts also convenes to evaluate the proposals in light of the written reviews. The criteria for these evaluations vary across federal agencies, but they involve a balance of scientific rigor and potential impact on the world. Only a very small portion of the proposals submitted for any grant opportunity—only those that are evaluated as having extraordinary scientific rigor and social significance—ultimately receive funding.

Decisions about science funding are careful and rigorous, based on the evaluations of numerous qualified experts. Such a process is necessary to ensure that the best science and discoveries are encouraged and supported. This funding supports faculty, staff, and students; enables the development of new technology, equipment, interventions, and medicines; and ultimately plays an enormous role in the nation’s ability to address pressing challenges.

If we want to treat diseases, improve AI, and push the boundaries of discovery, stable investment in research is not just important—it’s essential.

advertisement
More from Eden King, Ph.D., and Mikki Hebl, Ph.D.
More from Psychology Today