Funding Opportunities at NSFFunding Opportunities at NSF
2010 Neuroeconomics Conference2010 Neuroeconomics Conference
Jona...
Where’s the money?Where’s the money?
Where’s the Money forWhere’s the Money for
Neuroecon?Neuroecon?
• 2 potential sources
– Special solicitations (primarily C...
4
Special Solicitations for NEsSpecial Solicitations for NEs
• Collaborative Research in
Computational Neuroscience (CRCNS...
More on CRCNSMore on CRCNS
• Research Proposals, US-German Research
Proposals collaboratives, Data Sharing
Proposals
• Sup...
Unsolicited proposal sources –Unsolicited proposal sources –
funding the old fashion wayfunding the old fashion way
• Sour...
Programs in SBEPrograms in SBE
January 18 & August 18
Decision, Risk, & Management
Sciences
Economics
Law and Social Scien...
Relevant Programs in SESRelevant Programs in SES
• Decision, Risk and Management Science (7 M)
– research that explores fu...
Relevant Programs In BCSRelevant Programs In BCS
• Cogntive Neuroscience (8 M)
• how the human brain supports thought, per...
Other PossibilitiesOther Possibilities
• Mathematical Biology (bio directorate)
• Neural Systems (bio directorate)
• Robus...
Finding a Home(s) at NSFFinding a Home(s) at NSF
• Come to
www.nsf.gov
• Click on Awards
Search the AbstractsSearch the Abstracts
• Click on the:
– Search all Fields tab
• Type in keywords:
– Multiattribute util...
Viola – Potential HomesViola – Potential Homes
• Welcome to your
potential homes:
– DRMS
– SBIR (for applied
work with goa...
Once you have some leadsOnce you have some leads
• Send a 1-2 page e-mail to the
relevant program director(s)
– Research q...
So What is The ProcessSo What is The Process
• You work, work, work
– Submit January or August 18th
.
• I work, work, work...
ThenThen
• You experience
– The thrill of victory (p approx. .25)
– the agony of defeat (p approx. 75)
Silly Submitter TricksSilly Submitter Tricks
• Multiattribute Utility in an Emotional
Space
– “In this proposal I outline ...
A Savvy AlternativeA Savvy Alternative
• From the Grant Proposal Guide
– c. List of Suggested Reviewers or
Reviewers Not t...
Another Silly Submitter TrickAnother Silly Submitter Trick
• From the Grant
Proposal Guide
– c. List of Suggested
Reviewer...
Now, You might thinkNow, You might think
• It’s not worth wasting a lot of time writing the
proposal
• After all, why woul...
Now, You might thinkNow, You might think
• It’s not important to proofread your proposal carefully.
• After all, this isn’...
Now, You might thinkNow, You might think
• You shouldn’t waste time making sure the project
summary and abstract clearly a...
Now, You might thinkNow, You might think
• It’s not important to write clearly and succinctly.
After all, reviewers might ...
Now, You might thinkNow, You might think
• It’s not necessary to provide details about the
specifics of your research plan...
Now, You might thinkNow, You might think
• It’s not worth paying attention to the reviews
of previous versions of your pro...
Good Luck!Good Luck!
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Funding Opportunities at NSF 2010 Neuroeconomics Conference

395
-1

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
395
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent federal agency created by Congress in 1950 "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense…"
    annual budget of about $6.9 billion (FY 2010),
    funding source for approximately 20 percent of all federally supported basic research conducted by America's colleges and universities.
    In social sciences, NSF is the major source of federal backing.
    total workforce of about 2,100 at its Arlington, Va., headquarters, including approximately 1,400 career employees, 200 scientists from research institutions on temporary duty, 450 contract workers
    7 Directorates -
  • As pertains to funding for neuroeconomics, the sources of funds are either the standings programs or special (usually cross-directorate) solicitations.
  • <number>
    Program solicittion for CRCNS is in approval process now.
    Historically, focus has been on lower level issues but current solicitation specifically calls out research on cognitive and decision making functions and dysfunctions – impluse control, alcohol and drug abuse disorders, judgment choice formation and social interaction – trust, competition and cooperativeness. Likely submission date – Nov 2011.
    Stay tuned.
  • Within each division within the sbe directorate there are specific programs likely to be relevant. In SBE – the DRMS, MMS, and Econ, in BCS – cog neuro, PAC, social psych and dls.
  • Three sbe programs of direct potential relevance in terms of neuroecon funding. DRMS, MMS and obviously Economics.
  • A little more detail on programs in Engineering directorate.
    OR or DRMS – how to decide – if I can replace “person” with “widget” without it making a difference – its OR, in DRMS people must make a difference.
  • Let’s focus on the standing programs – what is the best way to find a home?
    Searching abstracts of funded research.
  • List of projects shows title, funding directorate and program, PI name, university.
    What’s “Engineering Design and Innovation?”
    The EDI program supports research leading to design theory and to tools and methods that enable implementation of the principles of design theory in the practice of design across the full spectrum of engineered products. The program focus is on gaining an understanding of the basic processes and phenomena underlying a holistic, life-cycle view of design where the total system life-cycle context recognizes the need for advanced understanding of the identification and definition of preferences, analysis of alternatives, effective accommodation of uncertainty in decision-making, and the relationship between data and knowledge in a digitally-supported process. The program funds advances in basic design theory, tools, and software to implement design theory and new design methods that span multiple domains, such as design for the environment and for manufacturability.
  • Email the Program Director –
    Policy here varies – some Program Directors encourage visits.
    Others- like DRMS – discourage them – there are fairness and time issues
  • A not to wise way to start your proposal (think about it – I have to assign six reviewers to something on the order of 50 proposals (300) ) so who is likely going to come to my mind when I think about reviewers for your proposal? – nsf grantees who do work in decision making and emotion.
  • A much better alternative – if there are people you don’t want to review your proposal, you can (within reason) request they not be asked.
  • Again, I have something on the order of 300 reviewers to assign. Given I can get up to 8 reviews if all goes well (more for a co-reviewed submission) I am not too worried about bias if I choose one of the reviewers you recommend. But make the recommendations
    a) useful (not the usual suspects)
    b) relevant
    c) unconflicted
  • Funding Opportunities at NSF 2010 Neuroeconomics Conference

    1. 1. Funding Opportunities at NSFFunding Opportunities at NSF 2010 Neuroeconomics Conference2010 Neuroeconomics Conference Jonathan W. Leland Decision, Risk and Management Science Division of Social and Economic Sciences Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences National Science Foundation
    2. 2. Where’s the money?Where’s the money?
    3. 3. Where’s the Money forWhere’s the Money for Neuroecon?Neuroecon? • 2 potential sources – Special solicitations (primarily CRCNS) – Unsolicited proposals to standing programs (primarily in Social, Behavior and Economic Sciences directorate.)
    4. 4. 4 Special Solicitations for NEsSpecial Solicitations for NEs • Collaborative Research in Computational Neuroscience (CRCNS) TENTATIVE • Objective - support collaborative activities that advance the understanding of nervous system structure and function, mechanisms underlying nervous system disorders, and computational strategies used by the nervous system. • Participating organizations – NSF, NIH, BMBF (Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung)
    5. 5. More on CRCNSMore on CRCNS • Research Proposals, US-German Research Proposals collaboratives, Data Sharing Proposals • Supports collaborative research between biomedical, biological, behavioral/cognitive/social scientists and computer, mathematical, physical sciences/engineering.
    6. 6. Unsolicited proposal sources –Unsolicited proposal sources – funding the old fashion wayfunding the old fashion way • Sources – SES and BCS with SBE – Funding from other NSF directorates.
    7. 7. Programs in SBEPrograms in SBE January 18 & August 18 Decision, Risk, & Management Sciences Economics Law and Social Science Methodology, Measurement & Statistics Political Science Sociology February 1 & August 1 Societal Dimensions of Eng., Science, & Tech. Science & Technology Studies February 2 Innovation and Organizational Sciences • December 1 & July 1 • Archaeology & Archaeometry • Physical Anthropology • January 1 & August 1 • Cultural Anthropology • • January 15 & July 15 • Cognitive Neuroscience • Developmental & Learning Sciences • Perception, Action, & Cognition Linguistics • Social Psychology • • January 15 & August 15 • Geography & Regional Science
    8. 8. Relevant Programs in SESRelevant Programs in SES • Decision, Risk and Management Science (7 M) – research that explores fundamental issues in judgment and decision making, risk analysis, management science, and organizational behavior • Methodology, Measurement, and Statistics (4 M) – Statistical methodology/modeling directed towards the social and behavioral sciences – Methodological aspects of procedures for data collection • Economics (25 M) – Empirical and theoretical economic analysis as well as work on methods for rigorous research on economic behavior.
    9. 9. Relevant Programs In BCSRelevant Programs In BCS • Cogntive Neuroscience (8 M) • how the human brain supports thought, perception, affect, action, social processes, and other aspects of cognition and behavior • Perception, Action and Cognition (7.3 M) • vision, audition, haptics, attention, memory, reasoning, written and spoken discourse, motor control, and developmental issues in all topic areas. • Development and Learning Science (6.6 M) • cognitive, linguistic, social, cultural, and biological processes related to children's and adolescents' development and learning.  • Social Psychology (6.7 m) • research on human social behavior, including cultural differences and development over the life span. 
    10. 10. Other PossibilitiesOther Possibilities • Mathematical Biology (bio directorate) • Neural Systems (bio directorate) • Robust Intelligence (cise directorate) • Biomedical engineering (eng directorate)
    11. 11. Finding a Home(s) at NSFFinding a Home(s) at NSF • Come to www.nsf.gov • Click on Awards
    12. 12. Search the AbstractsSearch the Abstracts • Click on the: – Search all Fields tab • Type in keywords: – Multiattribute utility
    13. 13. Viola – Potential HomesViola – Potential Homes • Welcome to your potential homes: – DRMS – SBIR (for applied work with goal of commercialization – Engineering Design and Innovation – Magnetospheric Physics?
    14. 14. Once you have some leadsOnce you have some leads • Send a 1-2 page e-mail to the relevant program director(s) – Research question(s) – Theory on which you build – Methods – Major citations (including journal name)
    15. 15. So What is The ProcessSo What is The Process • You work, work, work – Submit January or August 18th . • I work, work, work – Perhaps request co-review if you didn’t – Send out requests for 6 external reviews – Assign proposal to 2 DRMS panelists for review. – Convene panel to discuss proposals and make funding recommendations
    16. 16. ThenThen • You experience – The thrill of victory (p approx. .25) – the agony of defeat (p approx. 75)
    17. 17. Silly Submitter TricksSilly Submitter Tricks • Multiattribute Utility in an Emotional Space – “In this proposal I outline a series of experiments which will demonstrate that Professor Lerner’s model of emotion- specific influences on judgment is not specific and is, if fact, just silly.”
    18. 18. A Savvy AlternativeA Savvy Alternative • From the Grant Proposal Guide – c. List of Suggested Reviewers or Reviewers Not to Include (optional) • Proposers may include a list of suggested reviewers who they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal. • Proposers also may designate persons they would prefer not review the proposal, indicating why.
    19. 19. Another Silly Submitter TrickAnother Silly Submitter Trick • From the Grant Proposal Guide – c. List of Suggested Reviewers or Reviewers Not to Include (optional) – Proposers may include a list of suggested reviewers who they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal. – Proposers also may designate persons they would prefer not review the proposal, indicating why. • Suggested Reviewers for “Multiattribute Utility in an Emotional Space” – Danny Kahneman – bet the program director hasn’t heard of him! – College roommate ( alwayscrying@emot.com) was always pretty emotional – John Coauthoredallmyother papers – (almostsameemailasme@ questionableu.edu) - very knowledgeable about my work.
    20. 20. Now, You might thinkNow, You might think • It’s not worth wasting a lot of time writing the proposal • After all, why would reviewers think that just because you wrote a sloppy proposal, you’d do sloppy research? • Bad Idea
    21. 21. Now, You might thinkNow, You might think • It’s not important to proofread your proposal carefully. • After all, this isn’t grade school. It’s the quality of the ideas that count, not neatness. • Bad Idea
    22. 22. Now, You might thinkNow, You might think • You shouldn’t waste time making sure the project summary and abstract clearly and concisely outline the problem, the objectives, the project activities, and expected outcomes. After all, reviewers can darn well study the full proposal if they want to get a clear idea about what you are proposing to do. Let them earn their understanding the old- fashioned way by slogging through your proposal page-by-page. • Bad Idea
    23. 23. Now, You might thinkNow, You might think • It’s not important to write clearly and succinctly. After all, reviewers might not respect you if your proposal is too easy to understand. Bad Idea
    24. 24. Now, You might thinkNow, You might think • It’s not necessary to provide details about the specifics of your research plan – clearly stated hypotheses, a crisp summary of your research plan and procedures, and the other elements that make it clear exactly how you intend to go about answering your research questions. • After all, the reviewers will not require all this extraneous detail in order to recognize the distinctively high quality of your work. A simple “trust-me” appeal should do the trick. • Bad Idea
    25. 25. Now, You might thinkNow, You might think • It’s not worth paying attention to the reviews of previous versions of your proposal. Where do they find these ignoramuses anyway? They’re not even smart enough to understand your proposal or, if they do, they don’t understand why it’s important. Don’t bother trying to address their questions. Maybe you’ll get better reviewers next time. • Bad Idea
    26. 26. Good Luck!Good Luck!
    1. A particular slide catching your eye?

      Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

    ×