4 ms·

Of course it has a chilling effect on the researchers. If Google stops paying for your research you would have to find another source of money, that's not easy

Of course it has a chilling effect on the researchers. If Google stops paying for your research you would have to find another source of money, that's not easy for everyone. So they will tend to write stuff in a Google-friendly fashion just to secure the money. That does not mean they will spin everything but it will surely influence the tone of their publications.

Godel_unicode 9y ago
You're equating Google's feeling about unkind results with Google's feeling about wasting the money on a donut shop. Why is that?
- Spooky23 9y ago
  Its not an A or B question. A company isn't a charity handing out awards to random people. If they give someone money to support research without specific goals, playing nice is implied. Unprofessional conduct (blowing money on donuts) is reasonably expected to not attract more funds. But when does undesirable conduct come into play? Would they fund a guy who discovered that YouTube improves high school academic performance by 48%? Would they fund a guy who finds that YouTube slows child cognitive development? You don't know, because the company's decision making is unknown. But a clever professor who needs grants could probably make a good guess. Even if Google (or any other company) doesn't act that way or has no desire to influence research, the perception of bias still exists, and that undermines science.
  - euyyn 9y ago
    How could a company avoid that perception from the part of professors, though?
    - Spooky23 9y ago
      If the goal was to advance basic research, hire people Bell Labs style and public research in the name of the company or setup a foundation where the funding decisions are made through a process not controlled by management. My local library is prohibited from accepting many kinds of gifts as a government entity. So the library board setup a "Friends of the Library" non-profit with its own board that can accept and distribute cash or other gifts, subject to reporting requirements. You need a similar concept where you give up control. They key thing here is that perception is more important than reality. You need to work to build and maintain trust.
darawk 9y ago
If they were worried about that they could just not take their money in the first place. I'm not sure why this is a problem.
BeetleB 9y ago
>Of course it has a chilling effect on the researchers. If Google stops paying for your research you would have to find another source of money, that's not easy for everyone. Except that this is very, very normal in almost all research that requires funding. Talk to faculty members in engineering departments, and they'll tell you they often spend most of their professional time grant writing. Saying this has a chilling effect is like saying a store requiring money in exchange for goods has a chilling effect because it means the purchaser is constantly in need of earning money to eat.

Godel_unicode 9y ago

You're equating Google's feeling about unkind results with Google's feeling about wasting the money on a donut shop. Why is that?

Spooky23 9y ago
Its not an A or B question. A company isn't a charity handing out awards to random people. If they give someone money to support research without specific goals, playing nice is implied. Unprofessional conduct (blowing money on donuts) is reasonably expected to not attract more funds. But when does undesirable conduct come into play? Would they fund a guy who discovered that YouTube improves high school academic performance by 48%? Would they fund a guy who finds that YouTube slows child cognitive development? You don't know, because the company's decision making is unknown. But a clever professor who needs grants could probably make a good guess. Even if Google (or any other company) doesn't act that way or has no desire to influence research, the perception of bias still exists, and that undermines science.
- euyyn 9y ago
  How could a company avoid that perception from the part of professors, though?
  - Spooky23 9y ago
    If the goal was to advance basic research, hire people Bell Labs style and public research in the name of the company or setup a foundation where the funding decisions are made through a process not controlled by management. My local library is prohibited from accepting many kinds of gifts as a government entity. So the library board setup a "Friends of the Library" non-profit with its own board that can accept and distribute cash or other gifts, subject to reporting requirements. You need a similar concept where you give up control. They key thing here is that perception is more important than reality. You need to work to build and maintain trust.

darawk 9y ago

If they were worried about that they could just not take their money in the first place. I'm not sure why this is a problem.

BeetleB 9y ago

>Of course it has a chilling effect on the researchers. If Google stops paying for your research you would have to find another source of money, that's not easy for everyone. Except that this is very, very normal in almost all research that requires funding. Talk to faculty members in engineering departments, and they'll tell you they often spend most of their professional time grant writing. Saying this has a chilling effect is like saying a store requiring money in exchange for goods has a chilling effect because it means the purchaser is constantly in need of earning money to eat.