Увійти

Готові списки джерел за темами / Peer review of research grant proposals / Книги

Книги з теми "Peer review of research grant proposals"

Щоб переглянути інші типи публікацій з цієї теми, перейдіть за посиланням: Peer review of research grant proposals.

Автор: Grafiati

Опубліковано: 4 червня 2021

Оновлено: 3 березня 2023

Оформте джерело за APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard та іншими стилями

Оберіть тип джерела:

Ознайомтеся з топ-31 книг для дослідження на тему "Peer review of research grant proposals".

Біля кожної праці в переліку літератури доступна кнопка «Додати до бібліографії». Скористайтеся нею – і ми автоматично оформимо бібліографічне посилання на обрану працю в потрібному вам стилі цитування: APA, MLA, «Гарвард», «Чикаго», «Ванкувер» тощо.

Також ви можете завантажити повний текст наукової публікації у форматі «.pdf» та прочитати онлайн анотацію до роботи, якщо відповідні параметри наявні в метаданих.

Переглядайте книги для різних дисциплін та оформлюйте правильно вашу бібліографію.

1

National Cancer Institute (U.S.), ed. Share your expertise with us. [Bethesda Md.]: National Cancer Insitute, 2001.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

2

Langfeldt, Liv. Fagfellevurdering som forskningspolitisk virkemiddel: En studie av fordelingen av frie midler i Norges forskningsråd. Oslo: NIFU, Norsk institutt for studier av forskning og utdanning, 1998.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

3

Hill, Anne. Addressing common problems: Guidance for submitting European Commission fifth framework proposals. Birmingham: Outreach Press, 2001.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

4

Richard, Mandel. A half century of peer review, 1946-1996. Bethesda, MD (2760 Eisenhower Ave., Alexandria 22314): Division of Research Grants, National Institutes of Health, 1996.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

5

Center, Horace Mann Learning, ed. Reviewing applications for discretionary grants and cooperative agreements: A workbook for application reviewers. [Washington, D.C.?]: Horace Mann Learning Center, 1988.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

6

Center, Horace Mann Learning. Reviewing applications for discretionary grants and cooperative agreements: A workbook for application reviewers. Washington, D.C.?]: Horace Mann Learning Center, U.S. Department of Education, 1991.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

7

S, Frankel Mark, and Cave Jane, eds. Evaluating science and scientists: An east-west dialogue on research evaluation in post-communist Europe. Budapest: Central European University Press, 1997.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

8

Learning Anytime Anywhere Partnerships: Information & application materials : deadline for submissions: April 2, 1999. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education, 1999.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

9

Shestopal, A. V., та V. I. Konnov. Sot︠s︡ialʹno-politicheskai︠a︡ funkt︠s︡ii︠a︡ nat︠s︡ionalʹnykh nauchnykh fondov: Sbornik nauchnykh stateĭ. Moskva: Izdatelʹstvo "MGIMO-Universitet", 2016.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

10

1956-, Evans Martyn, ed. A decent proposal: Ethical review of clinical research. New York, N.Y: Wiley, 1996.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

11

D, Muraskin Lana, United States. National Educational Research Policy and Priorities Board, and Educational Resources Information Center (U.S.), eds. Strengthening the standards: Recommendations for OERI peer review : summary report, draft January 30, 1999. [Washington, DC]: U.S. Dept. of Education, National Educational Research Policy and Priorities Board, 1999.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

12

The merit review process: Ensuring limited federal resources are invested in the best science : hearing before the Subcommittee on Research and Science Education, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, House of Representatives, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, first session, Tuesday, July 26, 2011. Washington: U.S. G.P.O., 2011.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

13

Dogmatism in science and medicine: How dominant theories monopolize research and stifle the search for truth. Jefferson, N.C: McFarland & Co., 2012.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

14

D, Muraskin Lana, August and Associates, and United States. National Educational Research Policy and Priorities Board, eds. Strengthening the standards: Recommendations for OERI Peer Review : summary report prepared for the National Educational Research Policy and Priorities Board. Washington, DC (80 F St., NW, Washington 20208-7564): The Board, 1999.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

15

Badji, Toure Lalla, and African Development Foundation, eds. Mobilizing the grassroots for community health: An ADF research reader. Washington, D.C. (1400 Eye St., N.W., 10th floor, Washington 20005): African Development Foundation, 1995.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

16

Badji, Toure Lalla, and African Development Foundation (U.S.), eds. Mobilizing the grassroots for community health: An ADF research reader. Washington, D.C. (1400 Eye St., N.W., 10th floor, Washington 20005): African Development Foundation, 1995.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

17

National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on the Department of Energy-Office of Science and Technology's Peer Review Program., ed. Peer review in the Department of Energy, Office of Science and Technology: Interim report. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press, 1997.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

18

National Institutes of Health (U.S.), ed. NIH peer review of research grant applications. [Bethesda, Md.]: Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, 1988.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

19

National Institutes of Health (U.S.), ed. NIH peer review of research grant applications. [Bethesda, Md.]: Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institites of Health, 1987.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

20

Office, General Accounting. Department of Education grant award. Washington, D.C: The Office, 1992.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

21

Office, General Accounting. Department of Education grant award. Washington, D.C: The Office, 1992.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

22

Share your expertise with us. [Bethesda, Md.]: National Cancer Institute, 2002.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

23

(Editor), Tom Jefferson, and Fiona Godlee (Editor), eds. Peer Review in Health Sciences. Bmj Publishing Group, 1999.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

24

(Editor), Mark S. Frankel, and Jane Cave (Editor), eds. Evaluating Science and Scientists: An East-West Dialogue on Research Evaluation in Post-Communist Europe. A Central European University Press Book, 1997.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

25

Final report. Washington, D.C: National Science Foundation, 1986.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

26

(US), National Research Council, and Committee on the Department of Energy-Office of Science and Technology's Peer Review Program. Peer Review in the Department of Energy-Office of Science and Technology: Interim Report. National Academies Press, 1997.

Знайти повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

27

Peach, Ken. Reviewing Research, Making Proposals and Evaluating Science. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198796077.003.0011.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

This chapter focuses on the review process, the process of writing a proposal and the evaluation of science. The usual way that science is funded these days is through a proposal to a funding agency; if it satisfies peer review and there are sufficient resources available, it is then funded. Peer review is at the heart of academic life, and is used to assess research proposals, progress, publications and institutions. Peer review processes are discussed and, in light of this discussion, the art of proposal writing. The particular features of making fellowship proposals and preparing for an institutional review are described. In addition, several of the methods used for evaluating and ranking research and research institutions are reviewed, including the Research Assessment Exercise and the Research Excellence Framework.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

28

Spyns, Peter, та Maria-Esther Vidal. Научное рецензирование. Лучшие практики и рекомендации. Редактори Elena Tikhonova та Olga Kirillova. Eco-Vector, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.17816/spr202101.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

This booklet aims to tackle this problem by providing a practical introduction to the practice of peer reviewing. Although it mainly focuses on paper reviewing for scientific events in the domain of computer science and (business) informatics, many of the principles, tips, tricks, and examples are generalizable to journal reviewing and other scientific domains. Some of the principles and tips can also be applied when reviewing proposals for research projects or grants. In addition, many aspects of this booklet will also benefit authors of scientific papers (even outside computer science) as they will gain more insight into how papers are reviewed and hence where they have to pay attention to when writing their papers.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

29

Cho, Jeasik. Evaluating Qualitative Research. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199330010.001.0001.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

This book provides the qualitative research community with some insight on how to evaluate the quality of qualitative research. This topic has gained little attention during the past few decades. We, qualitative researchers, read journal articles, serve on masters’ and doctoral committees, and also make decisions on whether conference proposals, manuscripts, or large-scale grant proposals should be accepted or rejected. It is assumed that various perspectives or criteria, depending on various paradigms, theories, or fields of discipline, have been used in assessing the quality of qualitative research. Nonetheless, until now, no textbook has been specifically devoted to exploring theories, practices, and reflections associated with the evaluation of qualitative research. This book constructs a typology of evaluating qualitative research, examines actual information from websites and qualitative journal editors, and reflects on some challenges that are currently encountered by the qualitative research community. Many different kinds of journals’ review guidelines and available assessment tools are collected and analyzed. Consequently, core criteria that stand out among these evaluation tools are presented. Readers are invited to join the author to confidently proclaim: “Fortunately, there are commonly agreed, bold standards for evaluating the goodness of qualitative research in the academic research community. These standards are a part of what is generally called ‘scientific research.’ ”

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

30

Boyer-Kassem, Thomas, Conor Mayo-Wilson, and Michael Weisberg, eds. Scientific Collaboration and Collective Knowledge. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190680534.001.0001.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

Descartes once argued that, with sufficient effort and skill, a single scientist could uncover fundamental truths about our world. Contemporary science proves the limits of this claim. From synthesizing the human genome to predicting the effects of climate change, some current scientific research requires the collaboration of hundreds (if not thousands) of scientists with various specializations. Additionally, the majority of published scientific research is now coauthored, including more than 80% of articles in the natural sciences. Small collaborative teams have become the norm in science. This is the first volume to address critical philosophical questions about how collective scientific research could be organized differently and how it should be organized. For example, should scientists be required to share knowledge with competing research teams? How can universities and grant-giving institutions promote successful collaborations? When hundreds of researchers contribute to a discovery, how should credit be assigned—and can minorities expect a fair share? When collaborative work contains significant errors or fraudulent data, who deserves blame? In this collection of essays, leading philosophers of science address these critical questions, among others. Their work extends current philosophical research on the social structure of science and contributes to the growing, interdisciplinary field of social epistemology. The volume’s strength lies in the diversity of its authors’ methodologies. Employing detailed case studies of scientific practice, mathematical models of scientific communities, and rigorous conceptual analysis, contributors to this volume study scientific groups of all kinds, including small labs, peer-review boards, and large international collaborations like those in climate science and particle physics.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

31

Martinho Belchior, Alirio, Carlos Mascarenhas, Maha Othman, Marília Rua, Mari Takashima, Marta Silva, Laila Albalushi, et al. iNURSING JOURNAL - Manual for Authors: The step-by-step instructions guide. International Nursing School Ltd., 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.52457/qprz4666.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

The iNursing Journal (iNJ) is the official journal of the International Nursing School (INS) and intends to disseminate the evidence-based nursing and health care, contributing to the advancement of relevant knowledge in the fields of clinic, management, education, research, advice, as well as to support decisions in public policies. The iNJ is an international journal that intends to receive proposals for publication from over the world, defending cultural diversity, as well as a diversity of contexts and of theoretical-methodological approaches that inform professionals, users, and political stakeholders for their decision-making. The articles published in iNJ must make clear their international knowledge translation and show a critical-reflective, scientific, theoretical and culturally sensitive approach. Although iNJ is mainly dedicated to research in nursing and health sciences, there are no restrictions on articles’ authorship, if they fit the requirements and format of the iNJ. In fact, the iNJ addresses and welcomes articles in health sciences and nursing. The journal publishes randomized trials, observational studies, qualitative research, systematic reviews, scoping reviews, among others. All articles submitted will be subject to double-blind peer review. The iNJ has an Editorial Team headed by the Editor-in-Chief that additionally has the assistance of the Deputy Editor-in-Chief, Editorial Team Members, and Reviewers. The Editorial Team in addition, is supported by an Office Administrator. Members of the Editorial Team meet regularly to evaluate the iNJ progress and to discuss overall goals. The frequency of the Editorial Team meetings varies and depends on the specific needs of the journal. In the following sections, we start to explain the Article Submission Guidelines, including the rules, bibliographic reference standards and article submission process. Followed by the Article Preparation section, that incorporates the different documents that must be submitted, including the Author consent and terms agreement that must be duly read, fulfilled and signed, and also give examples of checklists that can be used to prepare your article for submission. Finally, we present the iNJ Ethics Statement, Duties and Policies.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

Ми пропонуємо знижки на всі преміум-плани для авторів, чиї праці увійшли до тематичних добірок літератури. Зв'яжіться з нами, щоб отримати унікальний промокод!