OnCo
ideasIdea

Small grants that pay scientists to write up abandoned projects

Failed projects are not published because nobody has the time. Paying for a few months of writing would recover years of otherwise lost work.

Every lab has unpublished null results from completed projects: a hypothesis tested carefully that did not hold. The cost of writing them up is a few months of a postdoc's time with no career reward. A funder programme offering short 'completion grants' conditional on deposit in a negative-results venue would recover this work at very low cost per result.

Hypothesis
A programme of 200 completion grants per year produces at least 150 published or deposited null results per year, at a cost per result under one tenth of a typical project grant.
Rationale
Surveys suggest a substantial share of completed studies are never published, most often because the result was null. The barrier is effort, not data.
What would test it
Pilot with 50 grants; measure completion rate, time to deposit and downstream views or citations.
Maturity
speculative
Who has to act
philanthropy
Cost to try
Small (under $1M)
Years to first evidence
1
Bottlenecks it attacks
  • Failures are hidden · Negative trials, failed drugs and abandoned programmes are rarely published, so the same mistakes are repeated.
  • Funding follows fashion, not burden · Money goes to the cancers and questions that are easy or popular, not the ones that kill most or where a dollar would do most.

Connected

4top