Hacker News Reader

> Someone I know in immunology reported that only 5% of grant proposals received funding.

And what percent deserve funding? Given the incremental publish or perish nature of academia most of it likely isn’t (if it’s anything like the other sciences).

View on HN

Part of that pressure comes from the lack of funding though. When you have to fight against 100 other applications for a grant showing you have a recent track record of well-cited papers helps you stand out.

If researchers had steadier access to funding there would be less pressure to constantly publish 'breakthroughs' to secure next years funding.

Publish or perish applies to tenure, not funding so much.

In my experience, when resources become too scarce and competition too tight, actors start working on the surest bets, or playing the authority card or the most sensational moonshots.

IOW, real science gets shown the door and politicking sets up camp.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com