4 ms·
Even if the study doesn't live as long as its name states, a clear mission is useful because it guides people's decision making. A researcher in this should be
by rguzman 12y ago
Even if the study doesn't live as long as its name states, a clear mission is useful because it guides people's decision making. A researcher in this should be optimizing her efforts for the 100 year timescale and not for the ~5 year one.
- x1798DE 12y agoI don't see how that changes the individual researcher's incentive to make achieving short term, publishable discoveries a priority.
- dangerlibrary 12y agoOne concrete example would be data acquisition. Long term, large sample panel data sets take decades to produce, but are incredibly valuable if well designed / executed. If you are applying for funding as part of a 100 year study, you won't get continued funding unless you put in the effort up front to design the data acquisition correctly.
- Someone 12y agoAnother is what a project can offer your personnel. A four-year project will almost solely have temporary jobs. A hundred-year project will be able to offer more permanent assignments. That creates less 'publish or perish' pressure. It also may attract scientists with different character traits who wouldn't be able to compete in the rat race to tenure.
- slg 12y agoBut I am not sure how saying it is a 100 year study really changes that? Sure it might be better than a 5 year study, but is it better than one that is simply ongoing? Or how about opening a specialized department focused on this type of thing? 100 seems like an arbitrary number that was only chosen to make this seem important. "Stanford to host ongoing study on artificial intelligence" is just a less interesting headline.