3 ms·

> if grant applications are valued enough (e.g., needed to get promotion), scientists may be willing to spend even more time than is rational to do so This isn

> if grant applications are valued enough (e.g., needed to get promotion), scientists may be willing to spend even more time than is rational to do so This isn't worded properly. It's clearly rational for the scientists to spend time on the pursuit of grants. Otherwise they wouldn't be doing it. $100 in grant money is not the same as $100 in university income. In fact, the whole point of the grant is to cover the cost of doing research, and in principle should leave the university's net revenue unchanged. (In practice, overhead changes that, but that's a different topic.) The problem is that the university's objective is to spend as much on research as possible. Grant money is simply the fuel for that process. All else equal, more expensive research is very strongly preferred, because that increases research spending, and that improves the standing of the university. That is a seriously distorted set of incentives. All perfectly rational. Just insanely stupid.

denton-scratch 4y ago
> It's clearly rational for the scientists to spend time on the pursuit of grants. Otherwise they wouldn't be doing it. Is that worded properly? Are you really saying that nobody would ever do something irrational? If that's not what you mean, then we have to look at what "rational" means here. I think parent didn't mean "rational" in the sense of "maximising personal gain", but "maximising output of quality research".
BrandoElFollito 4y ago
> It's clearly rational for the scientists to spend time on the pursuit of grants. Otherwise they wouldn't be doing it. This is one of the reasons why I left academia. The insane run for grants was just starting and i said that I do not have any intent do do that. I was a scientist. Doing science. Not filling in papers and going to belly dancing shows. When I was told that this is compulsory and nobody else is going to do it, I sad good bye and left for the industry. I was earning 10x more, had no worries about funding or copier paper. Plenty of my friends did it and then academia was crying because of the brains drain and how unfair it was. The salme who said that grats are compulsory (they were sitting in the various jurys to accept them, instead of doing science)

denton-scratch 4y ago

> It's clearly rational for the scientists to spend time on the pursuit of grants. Otherwise they wouldn't be doing it. Is that worded properly? Are you really saying that nobody would ever do something irrational? If that's not what you mean, then we have to look at what "rational" means here. I think parent didn't mean "rational" in the sense of "maximising personal gain", but "maximising output of quality research".

BrandoElFollito 4y ago

> It's clearly rational for the scientists to spend time on the pursuit of grants. Otherwise they wouldn't be doing it. This is one of the reasons why I left academia. The insane run for grants was just starting and i said that I do not have any intent do do that. I was a scientist. Doing science. Not filling in papers and going to belly dancing shows. When I was told that this is compulsory and nobody else is going to do it, I sad good bye and left for the industry. I was earning 10x more, had no worries about funding or copier paper. Plenty of my friends did it and then academia was crying because of the brains drain and how unfair it was. The salme who said that grats are compulsory (they were sitting in the various jurys to accept them, instead of doing science)