- Email: [email protected]
Research Proposals
14 Research Proposals
Writing research proposals is such a common task among scientists that sometimes we forget what we are literally doing: asking for a substantial sum of money. Ask yourself, what would it take for you to give someone the amount of money you are requesting? What would you want to know about the person asking for funding and how they planned to use it? Although research proposals discuss scientific ideas, they are ultimately about convincing an organization that your objectives are worth the time, effort, budget, and other support that you request.
Designing Science Presentations. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-385969-3.00014-3 © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
181
Designing Science Presentations
The Purpose of a Research Proposal: To Justify The obvious goal of a research proposal is to obtain funding for your experiments, your salary, and (at the faculty level) your personnel. If you are a graduate student, you may write research proposals for class assignments or your qualifying exam, but the main function of these exercises is to prepare you for writing a real grant or fellowship proposal in the future. To achieve your goal of securing funding, it is useful to think of your proposal as having a fundamental purpose: to justify.
The ultimate goal of a research proposal is to justify why an outside organization should give you financial support instead of someone else. Your research proposal may be well written and your scientific ideas may seem obvious to you, but if you don’t clearly justify your rationale and thought process, your proposal will fail to convince your readers that your ideas are original, important, logical, and feasible.
What you must justify in a research proposal: •
Your scientific topic is important
•
Your specific scientific question/goal is important
•
You are an expert on your topic and have a command of the relevant scientific literature
•
You are fully qualified to perform the study
•
Your institution is a terrific place to perform the study
•
Your preliminary experiments suggest a likely chance of success
•
Your experimental design is logical
•
Your methods are feasible and you have the necessary expertise to perform them
•
You have alternative approaches in case your plan is initially unsuccessful
•
The results of your study will make a substantial contribution to a scientific field
Writing a research proposal requires a different kind of salesmanship than other forms of scientific writing. If you are new to the process, it is highly beneficial to enroll in a grant-writing workshop at your institution and examine several previously funded proposals. Notice how these successful proposals justify nearly everything they describe.
182
Designing Science Presentations
Pleasing Your Reviewers Different funding organizations review research proposals in different ways. Your proposal will typically be considered by one or two primary reviewers and possibly a third who may offer additional opinions when necessary. Your proposal will probably be discussed within a larger group of reviewers, although only those assigned to your proposal will read it thoroughly. Always consult the funding organization’s instructions to determine how reviewers will evaluate your proposal. Every grant or fellowship has different criteria, but the following criteria from the NIH are typical: Significance. Does the proposal address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Investigator. Are the principal investigator [this term also refers to graduate students and postdocs applying for fellowships] and other collaborators well-suited to the project? If in the early stages of a career, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their fields? Innovation. Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Approach. Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? Environment. Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements? After reading your proposal, the answers to all of these questions should be an enthusiastic YES. In addition to the above criteria, funding agencies will require detailed information about your personal background, physical setting, use of humans or vertebrate animals, etc. Reviewers will also expect a professional, well-written proposal. Because only a small percentage of applications are likely to be funded, every detail counts. Reviewers will check to make sure that you followed all directions and will care that your writing is accurate in grammar and style. Always remember that good writing implies good science.
183
Designing Science Presentations
The Structure of a Research Proposal Every funding agency has its own guidelines for the different sections of a grant or fellowship, and you absolutely must read and follow the instructions to ensure you write your proposal correctly. Usually a research proposal contains the following sections: Title. The best title succinctly describes the entire purpose of your proposal. Executive Summary (also called the Abstract or Specific Aims). This is a half-page or one-page summary of your entire research proposal in which you present your entire rationale, purpose, and specific aims. If well written, reviewers will look forward to reading the rest of your proposal. However, if you do not convey a clear sense of importance and novelty, some funding agencies may decide that your proposal is inadequate based on this section alone. Background and Significance. This consists of a brief literature review in which you clearly describe the relevant past work on your topic. This section leads to the declaration of your hypothesis or goal. If the work you cite does not relate to the research you propose, your reviewers will doubt your rationale (not to mention your scholarship) and your proposal will not be funded. Preliminary Data. Some funding agencies will require that you present preliminary data. This section demonstrates that you have initial success toward achieving your goal, increasing the likelihood that your proposed experiments will lead to positive results. Research Design and Methods. The meat of your proposal, this section contains a complete description of your research plan, usually divided into two or three individual specific aims. For each specific aim, you should address the following topics (even if not explicitly required by your funding agency): Rationale: The purpose of the experiments Experimental design: The experiments you will perform and the methods you will use to answer your scientific question Potential results and interpretations: All of the potential outcomes of your experiments, and how you will interpret each Potential problems and alternative approaches: The experimental or technical problems that can cause your experiment to fail and your alternative plans to ensure your study can continue Conclusion. This is a brief paragraph to cement why your proposal is highly important to fund.
184
Designing Science Presentations
The Logic of Your Experimental Design Your “Research Design and Methods” section may be the most important part of your entire proposal, not only because it presents your specific goals, ideas, and experiments, but also because it showcases the way you think as a scientist. In addition to details, this section must convey an overall sense of logic, demonstrating to the reviewers that you have a clear line of reasoning and well thought-out plan. You probably won’t have room to create a summary diagram for every specific aim in your proposal, but your reviewers must be able to perceive that for every question you ask, you have thought through the potential outcomes and associated interpretations. You must also describe back-up plans in the case that your initial experiments don’t work.
What is the effect of X on Y?
Result A
Result B
Result C
Technical failure
Interpretation A
Interpretation B
Interpretation C
Alternative approaches
If your reviewers cannot perceive your logical thought process, your proposal will make less of an impact and will not be funded.
185
Designing Science Presentations
Enhance the Visual Design of Your Proposals When you write a research or review article, your manuscript is typically 20–40 pages in length and (if accepted) will be reformatted by a page layout specialist prior to publication. In contrast, a research proposal is typically 5–10 pages in length and your target audience will see exactly what you submit to them with no improvement to the visual design.
The visual layout and design of your research proposal is highly important because it enhances the communication of your ideas, increases the perception of structure and logic, and implies clear, organized thinking. Also consider that the typical reviewer critically examines four to eight research proposals during a single funding cycle. Reading dozens of pages of text eventually becomes tedious, and anything you can do to make your proposal more pleasing to read will be much appreciated. Highlight your organization. Write all of your major headings (e.g., “Background and Significance,” “Preliminary Data,” “Research Design and Methods”) in a larger font size, in bold, and in all capital letters. Also write all of your subheadings in bold. Highlight your research hypothesis/goal. Both in your Executive Summary and at the end of your Background and Significance sections, write a clear, discrete sentence declaring your overall hypothesis or goal. Emphasize this sentence by underlining it or writing it in bold and/or italics. Include as many diagrams as possible. Diagrams are visually interesting and communicate information very quickly. In research proposals, you might think of including explanatory diagrams to communicate your hypothesis/goal or any uncommon methods. Also consider using timelines or other useful diagrams to depict your experimental design. Deliberately include empty space. Reviewers are turned off by too much text, especially if you use a relatively small font size and minimal margins. Separate your sections (or even individual paragraphs) with spacing and reduce wordiness as much as possible so you can increase the size of your margins and make your proposal more readable.
186
Designing Science Presentations
187
Designing Science Presentations
Summary: Don’ts and Dos Don’t consider a research proposal to be a simple academic exercise. Do recognize that each proposal you write is a request for a substantial sum of money. Don’t write about scientific ideas and experiments without justifying their importance. Do justify everything you describe in your proposal, including the importance of the problem, the novelty of your approach, the impact of your experiments, and your ability to ensure the project is a success. Don’t begin writing without thoroughly reading the criteria that will be used by the reviewers who will evaluate your proposal. Do ensure that you address every potential question your reviewers will ask in reference to each of the criteria they will use during the evaluation process. Don’t write about a specific aim without conveying a sense of logical scientific thinking. Do carefully consider all of the outcomes of your experiments and how you will logically interpret every possible result. Don’t assume that visual layout doesn’t matter. Do recognize that reviewers appreciate a clear, visual layout to better communicate ideas and increase readability. Don’t forget about the use of diagrams as a way to communicate complex information to reviewers. Do use as many diagrams as possible throughout your proposal to enhance the communication of your scientific ideas and experimental design.
188
Writing research proposals is such a common task among scientists that sometimes we forget what we are literally doing: asking for a substantial sum of money. Ask yourself, what would it take for you to give someone the amount of money you are requesting? What would you want to know about the person asking for funding and how they planned to use it? Although research proposals discuss scientific ideas, they are ultimately about convincing an organization that your objectives are worth the time, effort, budget, and other support that you request.
Designing Science Presentations. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-385969-3.00014-3 © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
181
Designing Science Presentations
The Purpose of a Research Proposal: To Justify The obvious goal of a research proposal is to obtain funding for your experiments, your salary, and (at the faculty level) your personnel. If you are a graduate student, you may write research proposals for class assignments or your qualifying exam, but the main function of these exercises is to prepare you for writing a real grant or fellowship proposal in the future. To achieve your goal of securing funding, it is useful to think of your proposal as having a fundamental purpose: to justify.
The ultimate goal of a research proposal is to justify why an outside organization should give you financial support instead of someone else. Your research proposal may be well written and your scientific ideas may seem obvious to you, but if you don’t clearly justify your rationale and thought process, your proposal will fail to convince your readers that your ideas are original, important, logical, and feasible.
What you must justify in a research proposal: •
Your scientific topic is important
•
Your specific scientific question/goal is important
•
You are an expert on your topic and have a command of the relevant scientific literature
•
You are fully qualified to perform the study
•
Your institution is a terrific place to perform the study
•
Your preliminary experiments suggest a likely chance of success
•
Your experimental design is logical
•
Your methods are feasible and you have the necessary expertise to perform them
•
You have alternative approaches in case your plan is initially unsuccessful
•
The results of your study will make a substantial contribution to a scientific field
Writing a research proposal requires a different kind of salesmanship than other forms of scientific writing. If you are new to the process, it is highly beneficial to enroll in a grant-writing workshop at your institution and examine several previously funded proposals. Notice how these successful proposals justify nearly everything they describe.
182
Designing Science Presentations
Pleasing Your Reviewers Different funding organizations review research proposals in different ways. Your proposal will typically be considered by one or two primary reviewers and possibly a third who may offer additional opinions when necessary. Your proposal will probably be discussed within a larger group of reviewers, although only those assigned to your proposal will read it thoroughly. Always consult the funding organization’s instructions to determine how reviewers will evaluate your proposal. Every grant or fellowship has different criteria, but the following criteria from the NIH are typical: Significance. Does the proposal address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Investigator. Are the principal investigator [this term also refers to graduate students and postdocs applying for fellowships] and other collaborators well-suited to the project? If in the early stages of a career, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their fields? Innovation. Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Approach. Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? Environment. Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements? After reading your proposal, the answers to all of these questions should be an enthusiastic YES. In addition to the above criteria, funding agencies will require detailed information about your personal background, physical setting, use of humans or vertebrate animals, etc. Reviewers will also expect a professional, well-written proposal. Because only a small percentage of applications are likely to be funded, every detail counts. Reviewers will check to make sure that you followed all directions and will care that your writing is accurate in grammar and style. Always remember that good writing implies good science.
183
Designing Science Presentations
The Structure of a Research Proposal Every funding agency has its own guidelines for the different sections of a grant or fellowship, and you absolutely must read and follow the instructions to ensure you write your proposal correctly. Usually a research proposal contains the following sections: Title. The best title succinctly describes the entire purpose of your proposal. Executive Summary (also called the Abstract or Specific Aims). This is a half-page or one-page summary of your entire research proposal in which you present your entire rationale, purpose, and specific aims. If well written, reviewers will look forward to reading the rest of your proposal. However, if you do not convey a clear sense of importance and novelty, some funding agencies may decide that your proposal is inadequate based on this section alone. Background and Significance. This consists of a brief literature review in which you clearly describe the relevant past work on your topic. This section leads to the declaration of your hypothesis or goal. If the work you cite does not relate to the research you propose, your reviewers will doubt your rationale (not to mention your scholarship) and your proposal will not be funded. Preliminary Data. Some funding agencies will require that you present preliminary data. This section demonstrates that you have initial success toward achieving your goal, increasing the likelihood that your proposed experiments will lead to positive results. Research Design and Methods. The meat of your proposal, this section contains a complete description of your research plan, usually divided into two or three individual specific aims. For each specific aim, you should address the following topics (even if not explicitly required by your funding agency): Rationale: The purpose of the experiments Experimental design: The experiments you will perform and the methods you will use to answer your scientific question Potential results and interpretations: All of the potential outcomes of your experiments, and how you will interpret each Potential problems and alternative approaches: The experimental or technical problems that can cause your experiment to fail and your alternative plans to ensure your study can continue Conclusion. This is a brief paragraph to cement why your proposal is highly important to fund.
184
Designing Science Presentations
The Logic of Your Experimental Design Your “Research Design and Methods” section may be the most important part of your entire proposal, not only because it presents your specific goals, ideas, and experiments, but also because it showcases the way you think as a scientist. In addition to details, this section must convey an overall sense of logic, demonstrating to the reviewers that you have a clear line of reasoning and well thought-out plan. You probably won’t have room to create a summary diagram for every specific aim in your proposal, but your reviewers must be able to perceive that for every question you ask, you have thought through the potential outcomes and associated interpretations. You must also describe back-up plans in the case that your initial experiments don’t work.
What is the effect of X on Y?
Result A
Result B
Result C
Technical failure
Interpretation A
Interpretation B
Interpretation C
Alternative approaches
If your reviewers cannot perceive your logical thought process, your proposal will make less of an impact and will not be funded.
185
Designing Science Presentations
Enhance the Visual Design of Your Proposals When you write a research or review article, your manuscript is typically 20–40 pages in length and (if accepted) will be reformatted by a page layout specialist prior to publication. In contrast, a research proposal is typically 5–10 pages in length and your target audience will see exactly what you submit to them with no improvement to the visual design.
The visual layout and design of your research proposal is highly important because it enhances the communication of your ideas, increases the perception of structure and logic, and implies clear, organized thinking. Also consider that the typical reviewer critically examines four to eight research proposals during a single funding cycle. Reading dozens of pages of text eventually becomes tedious, and anything you can do to make your proposal more pleasing to read will be much appreciated. Highlight your organization. Write all of your major headings (e.g., “Background and Significance,” “Preliminary Data,” “Research Design and Methods”) in a larger font size, in bold, and in all capital letters. Also write all of your subheadings in bold. Highlight your research hypothesis/goal. Both in your Executive Summary and at the end of your Background and Significance sections, write a clear, discrete sentence declaring your overall hypothesis or goal. Emphasize this sentence by underlining it or writing it in bold and/or italics. Include as many diagrams as possible. Diagrams are visually interesting and communicate information very quickly. In research proposals, you might think of including explanatory diagrams to communicate your hypothesis/goal or any uncommon methods. Also consider using timelines or other useful diagrams to depict your experimental design. Deliberately include empty space. Reviewers are turned off by too much text, especially if you use a relatively small font size and minimal margins. Separate your sections (or even individual paragraphs) with spacing and reduce wordiness as much as possible so you can increase the size of your margins and make your proposal more readable.
186
Designing Science Presentations
187
Designing Science Presentations
Summary: Don’ts and Dos Don’t consider a research proposal to be a simple academic exercise. Do recognize that each proposal you write is a request for a substantial sum of money. Don’t write about scientific ideas and experiments without justifying their importance. Do justify everything you describe in your proposal, including the importance of the problem, the novelty of your approach, the impact of your experiments, and your ability to ensure the project is a success. Don’t begin writing without thoroughly reading the criteria that will be used by the reviewers who will evaluate your proposal. Do ensure that you address every potential question your reviewers will ask in reference to each of the criteria they will use during the evaluation process. Don’t write about a specific aim without conveying a sense of logical scientific thinking. Do carefully consider all of the outcomes of your experiments and how you will logically interpret every possible result. Don’t assume that visual layout doesn’t matter. Do recognize that reviewers appreciate a clear, visual layout to better communicate ideas and increase readability. Don’t forget about the use of diagrams as a way to communicate complex information to reviewers. Do use as many diagrams as possible throughout your proposal to enhance the communication of your scientific ideas and experimental design.
188