The craziness of research funding. It costs us all. | Geraldine Fitzpatrick | TEDxTUWien
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 31 ก.ค. 2017
- Because of low success rates of many research funding schemes, significant time and effort can be lost on only writing about, not doing, research. For the few who get funding, more time can be lost reporting against an unrealistic view that research proceeds exactly as pre-planned. Altogether this costs society in lost innovations and it costs researchers in terms of unrealistic performance pressures. It's time to re-think both funding and evaluation cultures and promote sustainable research(er) goals.
Geraldine Fitzpatrick is Professor of Technology Design and Assessment and heads the Institute of Design and Assessment of Technology and the Human Computer Interaction. She is also an ACM Distinguished Scientist.
Thumbnail © Nadja Niemiec
This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at www.ted.com/tedx
![[UNCUT]"เศรษฐา" โดนบีบให้ลาออก เผยดีลลับ "ทักษิณ" ต้องต่อโปร ไม่งั้นเจอจุดจบ! I คนดังนั่งเคลียร์](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XlH3k81dxmE/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks for this excellent talk on the madness of current science funding. This is why at Fautor we are working hard to offer an alternative for funding research, which we believe to solve a number of the issues you point out.
Dr. Fitzpatrick, this was a great talk which opened a new stream of thought process for me. I now wonder how we can resolve this problem of "researchers spending more time talking about their research rather than doing research". As you are one of the expertise in coaching towards positive organizations, I am curious to know if you have any suggestions for professors - regarding protecting themselves for falling prey to such stressful funding battle and getting sidetracked from what they are actually passionate about.
Thanks!
Janki Bhimani
Janki at 14:47 she answers this clearly for that last segment. In summary she says if we are moving from GDP to SDP, then it is indicative that research also needs new goals in the framework of Research and Development. Essentially my assumption of the message was we need to use taxpayers to compensate for practical science and not pure theoretical. Honestly, researchers also need to learn the value of being wrong. Academia stinks of ego. We can pump money at an idea, but if the results do not show then swallow it up and let the world know. Stop the facade.
@@kurdishboy194 are you aware of the term publication bias? While there are some scientists with ego problems, the vast majority of overly optimistic publications comes from the fact that journals refuse to publish negative results. It is the fault of the system. Add long as researcher productivity is judged by the journal in which they publish, their hands are tied.
I cannot find adequate words to express my frustration when I hear Dr Fitzpatrick talk on this subject. Of course we all know that funds for research have to be allocated carefully, but much of this research is so important, and can result in benefits for our health,and our environment , and can push back the horizons in a whole spectrum of technological fields.
Quite honestly, in some utopian society I would have half the world doing academic research.
Sadly I see people with PhDs who are homeless, administrators in developing countries doing repetitive work that should have been computerized decades ago, politicians hurling insults at each other in the theatre that passes for Parliament in many countries...
Can we not do better than this in 2019? Perhaps another Noah's Ark is needed...
Brian Sykes 2020 looks astonishing doesn’t it?
2020: No. No you can't. 2021: Still unsure about this. 2022: Ok, maybe we should try. 2023: Come on guys, we can do better!
The Dr briefly mentioned that we are not doing research. It is often the case that what excites many funders are futuristic research that could lead to publication in high impact journals but not research that will improve the current health crisis. This might not be fair but many articles have been written about.
Thank you!
Thank you.
It's absurd how widely accepted in popular view is that only INCOME TAX counts as "paying taxes". Everyone pays taxes. Even a little kid buying a piece of candy. Those students payed taxes buying a ticket to the show, buying a car that drove them there, buying insurance for it, buying gas that fueled it, buying the clothes they're wearing... and so on ..
Fees don't count as taxes, but they really are. It's an additional cost of being allowed to do business. The money doesn't only supply the army and police tho (the protection racket), but also welfare, schools and hospitals. As the saying goes, it might be nice to live in a place without taxes, until there's a pothole in the main road.
Is the research funding an expense other than the tution fee?
At 15:40 UN sustainable development goal 5 is a redundant due to goal 10 if just going by the names of the goals. I understand your balance troubles on the risk/trust scale. Retailers deal with that with shoplifters. How much dollars of theft can you stop with how many dollars of security staff? Where is the point that putting more dollars into preventing theft costs more than the prevention of loss earns?
Researchers aren't shoplifters.
No, but the two problems are relatable. A researcher group could be mismanaging their funds in a way that is unproductive, thus management overhead is paid for to mitigate that risk. A group of customers or employees could be misappropriating store merchandise, thus security is paid for to mitigate that risk.
Balancing the cost of risk management to profit is important to any business. She argues in her TED talk that the current management overhead is too much. Thus I say it could be argued that the current management scheme is costing too much in productiveness which honestly defeats the purpose of having them there.
Similarly in weighing the cost of security staff to prevent shoplifting if your security staff is costing you more per year in wages to employ than you have ever seen in theft then perhaps you have overdone it. I suspect the curve is more complex than that with multiple factors, but that is the gist of my statement.
Economic inefficiency is just one part of the whole mess. What the current funding system produces, is a generation of scientists which are molded by bureaucratic micromanagement and financial precarity. What they internalize, is that sugarcoating reports is not just part of the process, it’s their main assignment and their most valued skill.
This problem stems from a misconception that science is built in logic. It is partly true and most scientist want to project this persona of being very logical. But we missed the point, that first and foremost, science’s bedrock is creative thinking and deep reflection.
yes but you publish the methods and everything and other scientists review it and point out its flaws. and everyones biases likely pretty much cancel each other out which is part of the point of the peer review process
These numbers are quite large, could we not split off a fraction of it to end homelessness?
How would splitting off a fraction end homelessness?
It is so true.
10/10
Remove this straight jacket from scientific research, and we will see beneficial advancements that will actually improve the quality of life for all.
I wonder if all of this funding and research really helps people of color.
If it did, it is not as significant as White population. In the US we have a grotesque health, income and education disparities, which hits African Americans and First Nation the hardest.
Abolish the NIH & CDC. I shouldn't be forced to fund her research. This is not the role of our federal government.
I bet you'd rather live in a tent and tell stories by the fire? It's a nice tho rustic life for sure. But the survival rate is low. Good luck, though! :)
Thanks to NIH for creating the template for Covid vaccine and giving it to Pfizer and Moderna at no cost. NIH has the patent. Glad my tax money helped out.
Perhaps you care more about going to wars and killing others than advancing medicine. I know your kind
What a deluded person you are. You’ll be crying that there’s no cure for your ailment very soon.