Small Research Grant: Questions the Reviewers Consider and Exemplary Applications
This program supports research for post-Ph.D. members who do not otherwise have the same amount of institutional resources to support a sustained record of external funding. Applicants have the opportunity to receive up to $1,500 in funding to support relatively inexpensive, well-powered studies.
We spoke with Dr. Oz Ayduk, who is serving as the 2017 Chair of the SPSP Grant Review Panel. The review committee evaluates proposals on:
- Their topic’s importance or significance to the field,
- The clarity and quality of the research methodology and analyses,
- The appropriateness of the budget,
- The feasibility of the project timeline, and
- The average amount of grant dollars awarded to the PI for research each year.
Oz fleshed out some of the questions the review committee considers when evaluating the first two criteria:
- Their topic’s importance or significance to the field
- Does the proposal identify a gap in knowledge, and justifying why it’s important to address it?
- Does the proposal pose a novel question or make novel predictions?
- Is the breath of the question being addressed appropriate (neither too broad nor too narrow)?
- The clarity and quality of the research methodology and analyses
- Is the design of the study appropriate for the question being asked?
- Are the constructs appropriately operationalized?
- Is the sample size sufficient? Is this a well-powered study?
- Are the proposed analyses appropriate?
You can also view the submissions from two past applicants whose proposals received high reviews:
- Bryan Koenig’s “Moral Punishment: How Much is Enough?”
- Katherine Goldey’s “The Mental Winner Effect: Effects of Imagined Victory and Defeat on Testosterone”