SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Do grant proposal texts matter for funding decisions? A field experiment
16 references·0 citing·41 second hop
Do grant proposal texts matter for funding decisions? A field experiment (2024)Do grant proposal texts matter for fundin…The Matthew effect in science funding (2018)The Matthew effect in science…Low agreement among reviewers evaluating the same NIH grant applications (2018)Low agreement among reviewers…Big names or big ideas: Do peer-review panels select the best science proposals? (2015)Big names or big ideas: Do pe…Quantifying Long-Term Scientific Impact (2013)Quantifying Long-Term Scienti…The impact of research grant funding on scientific productivity (2011)The impact of research grant …How social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect (2011)How social influence can unde…Fund people not projects (2011)Fund people not projectsCan Tweets Predict Citations? Metrics of Social Impact Based on Twitter and Correlation with Traditional Metrics of Scientific Impact (2011)Can Tweets Predict Citations?…Status, Quality, and Attention: What's in a (Missing) Name? (2010)Status, Quality, and Attentio…A Principal Component Analysis of 39 Scientific Impact Measures (2009)A Principal Component Analysi…Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact (2008)Universality of citation dist…Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of high-ability problem solvers (2004)Groups of diverse problem sol…The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation (1991)The reliability of peer revie…Chance and Consensus in Peer Review (1981)Chance and Consensus in Peer …The Matthew effect in science. The reward and communication systems of science are considered. (1968)The Matthew effect in science…The Matthew Effect in Science (1968)The Matthew Effect in ScienceAn index to quantify an individual's scientific research output (2005)The History and Meaning of the Journal Impact Factor (2006)Do Altmetrics Work? Twitter and Ten Other Social Web Services (2013)A review of theory and practice in scientometrics (2015)Factors affecting number of citations: a comprehensive review of the literature (2016)Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (1974)Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (1975)The wisdom of crowds: why the many are smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, economies, societies and nations (2004)Naïve Learning in Social Networks and the Wisdom of Crowds (2010)Political diversity will improve social psychological science (2014)Using the Delphi expert consensus method in mental health research (2015)Priorities in Scientific Discovery: A Chapter in the Sociology of Science (1957)Resistance by Scientists to Scientific Discovery (1961)The Scientific Community. (1966)Matthew Effects in Reading: Some Consequences of Individual Differences in the Acquisition of Literacy (1986)Power laws, Pareto distributions and Zipf's law (2005)The Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge (2007)The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1963)The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. (1964)Quantifying the evolution of individual scientific impact (2016)The Diversity–Innovation Paradox in Science (2020)Papers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time (2023)Citation Indexing-Its Theory and Application in Science, Technology, and Humanities (1980)Theory and practise of the g-index (2006)h-Index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields (2009)Human Problem Solving (1972)Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment. (1983)Tweeting From Left to Right (2015)Delphi Technique in Health Sciences: A Map (2020)On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Models (2021)Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research (1997)How well developed are altmetrics? A cross-disciplinary analysis of the presence of ‘alternative metrics’ in scientific publications (2014)Using Publication Metrics to Highlight Academic Productivity and Research Impact (2014)Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): A New Metric That Uses Citation Rates to Measure Influence at the Article Level (2016)Resistance to Reform: Status Quo Bias in the Presence of Individual-Specific Uncertainty: Comment (2004)Systemic and Reflexive: Foundations of Cumulative Dis/Advantage and Life-Course Processes (2018)Topic choice contributes to the lower rate of NIH awards to African-American/black scientists (2019)Global citation inequality is on the rise (2021)Little Science, Big Science (1963)From translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis (1983)Cumulative Advantage as a Mechanism for Inequality: A Review of Theoretical and Empirical Developments (2006)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 1968The Matthew Effect in Science6,700 cited
  • 1968The Matthew effect in science. The reward and communication systems of science are considered.4,791 cited
  • 2004Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of high-ability problem solvers2,103 cited
  • 2011Can Tweets Predict Citations? Metrics of Social Impact Based on Twitter and Correlation with Traditional Metrics of Scientific Impact1,085 cited
  • 2011How social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect1,017 cited
  • 2013Quantifying Long-Term Scientific Impact867 cited
  • 2008Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact810 cited
  • 2018The Matthew effect in science funding636 cited
  • 1981Chance and Consensus in Peer Review623 cited
  • 2009A Principal Component Analysis of 39 Scientific Impact Measures574 cited
  • 2011The impact of research grant funding on scientific productivity539 cited
  • 1991The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation496 cited
  • 2010Status, Quality, and Attention: What's in a (Missing) Name?239 cited
  • 2015Big names or big ideas: Do peer-review panels select the best science proposals?225 cited
  • 2018

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

Low agreement among reviewers evaluating the same NIH grant applications
210 cited
  • 2011Fund people not projects158 cited
  • Cited by

    No citing works inside the corpus for this window.