Title: Procrastinating Reviewer
Author: Anji Wall
Description: A procrastinating researcher must face a review board when he has not finished his assignment.
Keyword(s): Funding, Peer Review
Based On: (Shamoo & Resnik, 2003, p. 88)
Case: A busy researcher is part of an NIH grant review committee. He was given one month to review 35 proposals. He was the primary reviewer on 15 of the proposals, meaning that he had to read and write a report on each. He put off reviewing the proposals until the night before the meeting. He managed to write detailed reviews of half of the proposals that he was responsible for, and merely skimmed the other five, giving general comments. He did not read the other 20 proposals.
- What should the researcher do at the meeting?
- How would you have dealt with this situation?
- What are the possible consequences of his actions?
Source: Shamoo, A., & Resnik, D. (2003). Responsible Conduct of Research. New York: Oxford University Press.