| Literature DB >> 12564746 |
Abstract
In 1994 the Government Accounting Office (GAO) issued a report critical of some features of the proposal review processes at the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health. I provide two examples of procedures the agencies could have adopted to address the GAO's criticisms. I also relate the history of the two agencies' reluctance to use the psychological research literature to guide them as their new review procedures were instituted. Finally, I enumerate possible reasons for the agencies' decision not to follow or even test suggestions based on the judgment and decision-making research literature.Mesh:
Year: 2003 PMID: 12564746 DOI: 10.1111/1467-9280.01410
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Psychol Sci ISSN: 0956-7976