Limits...
How to Receive More Funding for Your Research? Get Connected to the Right People!

Ebadi A, Schiffauerova A - PLoS ONE (2015)

Bottom Line: However, not everyone is successful in obtaining the necessary funds.According to the results, although past productivity of researchers positively affects the funding level, our findings highlight the significant role of networking and collaboration.In fact, our results show that in the quest for the research money it is more important how researchers build their collaboration network than what publications they produce and whether they are cited.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Concordia Institute for Information Systems Engineering (CIISE), Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

ABSTRACT
Funding has been viewed in the literature as one of the main determinants of scientific activities. Also, at an individual level, securing funding is one of the most important factors for a researcher, enabling him/her to carry out research projects. However, not everyone is successful in obtaining the necessary funds. The main objective of this work is to measure the effect of several important factors such as past productivity, scientific collaboration or career age of researchers, on the amount of funding that is allocated to them. For this purpose, the paper estimates a temporal non-linear multiple regression model. According to the results, although past productivity of researchers positively affects the funding level, our findings highlight the significant role of networking and collaboration. It was observed that being a member of large scientific teams and getting connected to productive researchers who have also a good control over the collaboration network and the flow of information can increase the chances for securing more money. In fact, our results show that in the quest for the research money it is more important how researchers build their collaboration network than what publications they produce and whether they are cited.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

a) Average number of papers per researcher, 1996 to 2010, b) Average number of papers versus average funding, 1996 to 2010.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4519253&req=5

pone.0133061.g002: a) Average number of papers per researcher, 1996 to 2010, b) Average number of papers versus average funding, 1996 to 2010.

Mentions: Researchers publish their results in books and journal articles, and present them in scientific conferences in order to ensure priority for their discoveries and raise their scientific reputation. Number of publications has been widely used in the literature as a proxy for scientific output. Fig 2a depicts the average number of papers per researcher during the examined time interval. The trend can be divided into two parts as indicated by the vertical dashed line in the figure that are: decreasing trend from 1996 to 1999 and increasing trend afterwards. The slope of the increasing trend becomes steeper after 2003 and it continues till 2007 while after a sudden drop in 2008 it continues to augment with almost similar slope. Fig 2b shows the overall relation between the amount of average funding and the number of publications (in the absence of other factors). Intuitively it seems that there is a positive relation between funding and scientific output.


How to Receive More Funding for Your Research? Get Connected to the Right People!

Ebadi A, Schiffauerova A - PLoS ONE (2015)

a) Average number of papers per researcher, 1996 to 2010, b) Average number of papers versus average funding, 1996 to 2010.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4519253&req=5

pone.0133061.g002: a) Average number of papers per researcher, 1996 to 2010, b) Average number of papers versus average funding, 1996 to 2010.
Mentions: Researchers publish their results in books and journal articles, and present them in scientific conferences in order to ensure priority for their discoveries and raise their scientific reputation. Number of publications has been widely used in the literature as a proxy for scientific output. Fig 2a depicts the average number of papers per researcher during the examined time interval. The trend can be divided into two parts as indicated by the vertical dashed line in the figure that are: decreasing trend from 1996 to 1999 and increasing trend afterwards. The slope of the increasing trend becomes steeper after 2003 and it continues till 2007 while after a sudden drop in 2008 it continues to augment with almost similar slope. Fig 2b shows the overall relation between the amount of average funding and the number of publications (in the absence of other factors). Intuitively it seems that there is a positive relation between funding and scientific output.

Bottom Line: However, not everyone is successful in obtaining the necessary funds.According to the results, although past productivity of researchers positively affects the funding level, our findings highlight the significant role of networking and collaboration.In fact, our results show that in the quest for the research money it is more important how researchers build their collaboration network than what publications they produce and whether they are cited.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Concordia Institute for Information Systems Engineering (CIISE), Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

ABSTRACT
Funding has been viewed in the literature as one of the main determinants of scientific activities. Also, at an individual level, securing funding is one of the most important factors for a researcher, enabling him/her to carry out research projects. However, not everyone is successful in obtaining the necessary funds. The main objective of this work is to measure the effect of several important factors such as past productivity, scientific collaboration or career age of researchers, on the amount of funding that is allocated to them. For this purpose, the paper estimates a temporal non-linear multiple regression model. According to the results, although past productivity of researchers positively affects the funding level, our findings highlight the significant role of networking and collaboration. It was observed that being a member of large scientific teams and getting connected to productive researchers who have also a good control over the collaboration network and the flow of information can increase the chances for securing more money. In fact, our results show that in the quest for the research money it is more important how researchers build their collaboration network than what publications they produce and whether they are cited.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus