The grant peer review process

The role chance currently plays in ARC and NHMRC funding outcomes

The increasing role of video in scientific communication

The use of video in grant applications and grant review processes

Do researches embrace the concept of using video in grant applications?

Summary of Background and preliminary data

AIM 1: Use randomised control trials to test the capacity of recorded 10-minute PowerPoint presentations, relative to text-based 10-page Project Descriptions in ARC Discovery Project Grant Applications, to significantly enhance reviewer comprehension and recall of grant concepts.

AIM 2: Use randomised control trials to test the capacity of recorded 10-minute PowerPoint presentations, in place of text-based 10-page Project Descriptions in ARC Discovery Project Grant Applications, to yield more reliable and efficient rank-ordering of grant proposals by external reviewers.

AIM 3: Use mock ARC College of Experts grant review panels to assess the capacity of recorded 10-minute PowerPoint presentations, in place of text-based 10-page Project Descriptions, to yield more reliable rank-ordering of grant applications in panel scenarios.

Important considerations

Significance

Innovation

National benefit

Feasibility

CI Dr Mike Doran (Queensland University of Technology – 20% time commitment)

CI Associate Professor Adrian Barnett (Queensland University of Technology – 10% time commitment)

CI Professor Joan Leach (Australian National University – 15% time commitment)

CI Dr William Lott (Queensland University of Technology – 20% time commitment)

CI Dr Katie Page (Queensland University of Technology – 10% time commitment)

CI Dr William Grant (Australian National University – 10% time commitment)