Senior review expert: The national natural book is not in the middle, these 12 factors have a great impact!

In recent years, I have participated in the evaluation of NSF projects every year. This year's review of the Natural Science Fund has just come to an end. In the review process, the author has some personal feelings about what factors affect whether a fund book can hit.

Today, I have time to summarize and write it out, hoping to inspire and benefit the majority of scientific researchers who are preparing to apply for the Natural Science Foundation project. Understanding these factors that affect the fate of the Natural Fund is conducive to correctly assessing the possibility of applying for the Natural Fund, and will also have a relatively objective understanding of the application results, which is of course conducive to clarifying the direction of our future struggles and efforts.

The platform where the individual is located

The issue is sensitive, I can say political correctness, denying the issue. But from a realistic point of view, I have to say that this phenomenon does exist. Whether the applicant's unit brand is loud and whether the research platform is high-end has an impact on the hit rate of the application for the Natural Science Fund. A natural fund application text, from 985 universities, especially the top 10 universities, national key disciplines or national key laboratories and other platforms, is bound to be a plus point to improve the hit rate of the fund.

However, some unknown local colleges and universities have increased the difficulty of applying for general projects or key funds of the Natural Science Fund. Of course, there is an internal logic problem in this, often the more high-end units or platforms, the higher the level of researchers, and the more sophisticated the book is. Sometimes, it's hard to say with certainty how useful the platform is.

Personal teacher inheritance

According to my personal feelings, the current natural fund projects, especially the general projects, are becoming more and more circles, and the inheritance of teachers is very important. In a small direction of the Natural Science Foundation, the research strength of several units is often in a pivotal position. The famous professors and scholars in this group have a great influence in the circle, and they often have a big team, and the talents in the big team often appear together.

The leaders who compete in the big team have broad vision, advanced methods, and firmly grasp the forefront of topic selection. They are the disseminators and practitioners of the scientific ideas of their mentors, and their books are written with high quality and high research level, which is easy to hit. The application text is marked with master's and doctoral supervisors, and sometimes there is a suspicion of taking advantage of the reputation of the supervisor, and I don't know how the NSFC considers this issue.

Personal education status

The individual's education status will also have some impact on the judges' judgment. Although it is said to be as objective as possible, it will be affected to some extent. Doctors who graduated from Tsinghua University, Peking University and well-known foreign universities will inevitably crush the local doctors who graduated from ordinary universities in China, especially those who are not 211 and 985. Of course, there are objective reasons for this, and the former may often be better off than the latter if they are educated and trained in scientific research. The reviewer takes a look at the applicant's master's and doctoral study unit, who the master's supervisor and doctoral supervisor are, and basically knows the applicant's academic development context, research tradition and characteristics, and it is easy to form a preconceived impression.

Personal official titles

In the process of applying for a general project, it will be affected by the level of personal title and official rank. Of course, people who can have a high position are usually very academically strong and very hard. The higher the title and rank, the more or less it becomes a plus. Associate professors apply for youth funds, and professors, researchers, or deans, and laboratory directors apply for general projects, usually do not suffer. If you are the dean, laboratory director, academic committee leader, etc., these administrative or academic titles will bring positive points to yourself in the process of applying for the project.

Pre-research projects

If you have done several natural fund projects in the early stage, and they have done well, and the results are outstanding. At this time, it is relatively easy to apply for the Natural Fund. When writing the application text, it is easy to carry out the research story with the foreshadowing of the preliminary work. Of course, he has presided over several general projects in the early stage, which is also a manifestation of academic ability and scientific research reputation.

Now, it is easy for the Youth Fund project to break the game, as long as there are a few SCI papers, the text is clearly written, and the application can basically be successful, the difference is in one year, or two or three years. The difficulty lies in the breakthrough of the project, some people need a shorter time, only two or three years, and some people need a long time, even until retirement. The reviewers are often strict and critical of applicants who have never presided over a face-to-face project, because he is a newcomer and has never been blessed and certified.

Published papers in the early stage

Papers are the hard currency of the scientific world, especially the high-quality journals that have more impact in the field. The more papers published and the more high-end they are, the more beneficial they are for the project. To apply for the Youth Fund, I have published more than 3 papers in the first and second districts in the early stage, and I have published seven or eight papers in the first and second districts in the application project, which is still competitive at present.

I have reviewed a lot of youth funds, and modern young people are generally about ten years younger than me, but the foundation of the papers is generally good, and most of them have three or five very good SCI papers. Prudently publish fee-paying open-source papers and low-impact factor papers with a very poor reputation, which do not seem to have much of a positive impact on academic reputation, but have a negative impact, which is an impetuous, utilitarian, and speculative phenomenon.

Research methods and means

A project book, research methods are an important aspect to measure the level and quality of research. At present, scientific research has entered the development of in-depth and high-precision, and traditional research has been done a lot. If the whole article is a conventional, traditional research method, this book is mostly a repetition of the previous research, so the evaluation score is usually not very high. The appropriate use of the more advanced research methods can add a lot of color to the research. Of course, these methods usually rely on funding and instruments, so this is related to the applicant's presiding over scientific research projects in the early stage, and also related to whether the unit has high-end instrument support.

Some methods are more advanced in the field, and there are often hidden dangers when the applicant puts this method directly in the book. Usually, at least one or two SCI papers have been published in this way, and then they are put in to be convincing. Only when this method has been used, done, and written can you feel it and not make low-level mistakes.

Focus on the direction area

The Natural Fund of China pays more attention to the basics, and encourages long-term focus on a certain research direction, or long-term research work in a certain region. If you have a good research foundation in a certain direction or region, have published a bunch of papers, and have received a series of scientific research project grants, it is easy to apply for funding on this basis, which is the tradition of the Natural Science Foundation, which encourages long-term continuous research work in a certain direction. On the contrary, it is not easy to get funding if you change places everywhere, often change directions, chase hot spots, lack long-term work in a certain direction or place, and lack a foundation for preliminary research.

It is not easy to focus on one direction, if you do not receive funding for a long time, and you can store it in various projects for a long time, it is easy to scatter the research direction, resulting in the inability to focus, focus and concentrate, and the research depth is not enough. This is the main reason why many researchers have published a bunch of papers, but they have not been able to apply for natural funds for a long time.

Whether there is a good idea

Now is an era of lack of creativity, and the scientific research that can be done is basically done by everyone, and even repeated many times. If the topic of the book is not novel, too traditional and old, it is difficult to win. The topic must have a certain amount of novelty, at least to attract the judges, so that the judges are willing to read and read. If the judges find your research interesting and important, that's half the battle.

Many researchers tend to pay too much attention to safety, choose topics too conservatively, and lose opportunities, and a very small number of people are too unconventional and lack the foundation, resulting in a lack of credit, which needs to be grasped. The good idea of the book,That is, the selection of topics and ideas,It is the soul of the application text,Whether it is new or not,It is the key to affect whether the book can be in it。 Not only do you have a good idea, but you also have to have a good research plan that shows that you can actually bring it to life.

Don't be greedy

It is a very common phenomenon that applicants feel that the opportunity of the Natural Fund is rare, and they regard the fund application text as a pocket, and put the research content they have always wanted to do into it, resulting in too many research topics, too many miscellaneous contents, insufficient depth, and lack of condensation of key scientific issues. The research content of the project book should be as concise as possible, the goal should be concentrated, and you should not be greedy for more. Too much research content often exceeds the funding capacity of a scientific research project, resulting in too many research objectives, unfocused key scientific issues, and large and complex research programs.

The reviewers were tired and half dead after reading it, and in the end they didn't know what they wanted to study, and their impression was not good. The most terrible thing is that if there is too much content, too much will be lost, and the more loopholes there are, the greater the possibility of being shot. The more you write, the more confused you are, which is a manifestation of academic inconfidence. However, it is only the great wisdom of writing concisely, knowing how to make trade-offs, highlighting the key points, and focusing on the problems, which can see a person's academic self-confidence.

The quality of the book writing

On the basis of meeting the previous requirements,The quality of the book is also an important issue.。 When the reviewer receives the project application, he or she will look at the punctuation, references, technical routes, abstracts, innovations, language and writing throughout the whole article, and then look at the academic papers that the applicant has presided over and published in the past, and basically can see the general level of the researcher and form a first impression. The quality of book writing is the basic skill,It takes experience accumulation,It takes time to polish,A lot of novices don't pay attention to these basic work,As a result, all kinds of conditions are very good、But it can't be fulfilled for a long time.。

Judging from this year's review, the writing skills of the text of the Youth Natural Fund are generally good, and at first glance they are all the painstaking works of the applicants, most of them have been instructed by famous experts, and the book is written smoothly, and it is amazing to see it. This is in stark contrast to the quality of graduate thesis writing, which also shows that only a very small number of outstanding graduate students have the opportunity to engage in scientific research every year.

Have a bit of luck

On the basis of the first 4 objective conditions, after the applicant has thoughtfully conceived and written the topic, research content, scientific objectives and scientific questions, and research plan, the writing text is repeatedly polished, and the next step is to send the project book to be reviewed by the reviewers, which still requires some luck and fate. If the same application is sent to different reviewers, there will be some differences in the evaluation results. This is related to the reviewer's research experience and personal preferences, and it is also related to the quality of the reviewer who got the same batch of books that year.

Of course, the difference in the scores of different reviewers should not be very large, according to my personal feelings, it should be the difference between the upper and lower grades, and it is unlikely that one level will be jumped. Sometimes, small differences in the results of the review can often lead to very different results. Luck is a mysterious and mysterious thing, and it is not something we can control, and it often becomes an excuse for losers and a self-humble word for successful people.

Postscript to the blog post

Next, I will talk about the situation and background of the application for the Natural Science Fund, and nowadays, every scientific research institution and researcher attaches great importance to the Natural Science Fund. Natural fund is not only an important condition for the evaluation of professional titles, but also an important indicator to measure the scientific research strength of a researcher. The Natural Science Foundation is currently recognized as the fairest type of scientific research project in mainland China. The Natural Science Foundation is the most important force to promote the basic natural sciences in mainland China, and its evaluation process, funding amount, and project management are among the top projects in China.

The NSF Youth Program is usually the first pot of gold for young people to enter the scientific research circle. The Youth Fund is the touchstone of young people's scientific research ability, and if the Youth Fund is done well, the scientific research of young scientific and technological workers will gradually get on the right track. If the Youth Fund fails, it will not be easy to apply for the National Natural Science Fund in the future, and even the door of the National Natural Science Fund will be closed forever. Therefore, young friends must attach great importance to the implementation of the Youth Fund, do not disappoint the trust and entrustment of the National Natural Science Foundation of China, and must fulfill their original commitments.

The general project of the Natural Science Foundation is an important reference basis for scientific researchers to evaluate senior professional titles, and at the same time, it is also a source of scientific research funding for scientific research workers to continue to carry out work in a certain direction. The scale of the general project funding of the Natural Science Foundation is not small, and the scale of the R&D project is similar. But the management of natural funds is more efficient, and the moderator has more freedom. Therefore, in recent years, general projects have received the continuous attention of scientific research leaders. Different from the group of applicants for the Youth Fund, the competition for general projects is the most extensive and highest-level competition, and it is very difficult.

In this context, applying for natural funds has become the basic work of scientific researchers, and sometimes even the core work. How to successfully obtain funding from the Natural Science Foundation has become the key for scientific researchers to develop their own academic and research work. Some people are going well and have been funded for many years. Some people are not smooth, one in ten or eight years, and some people are promoted in the middle of the year, and it takes many years to succeed, of course, there are also people who are unsatisfactory in their lives, and their scientific research careers come to an end with retirement. I think everyone should keep their mentality and keep their suffering.

This blog post introduces the factors that affect the success of the application for the NSF project, from which it can be seen that the success is not only limited by the quality of the text writing, the selection of the project topic and the conciseness of scientific questions, but also by the identity of the applicant, the platform where the applicant is located, and other factors, we must have a systematic and clear understanding of this. If your application fails, or if you want to successfully apply for a Natural Science Foundation project, check this list one by one, and I think you will have a clearer self-judgment.

Be brave enough to accept those conditions that cannot be changed, such as the platform you are on, your education, etc.; It is also necessary to continuously strive to improve the factors that can be changed, such as the accumulation of literature reading and research methods, and the publication of high-quality SCI papers, which are all the directions we can work towards. Regardless of whether you can successfully apply for the Natural Fund, you must maintain a good attitude.

If you fail, you should analyze the reasons, find out your shortcomings, think long-term, gradually accumulate, lay a solid foundation, cultivate the direction, and improve the hit rate of future applications.

Scientific research is not all we have, it is only part of our work, and the Nature Fund is part of our work. Happily conduct scientific research, live happily, and face the application for the Natural Science Fund in a healthy and sunny manner. Regardless of success or failure, if you work hard and work hard, you will have a clear conscience, and you will have a lot of experience and gains.

This article is a summary of my long-term application for the Natural Science Fund, always missing, and becoming a doctor for a long time, and it is also a summary of my personal feelings about participating in the evaluation of the Natural Science Fund in the past seven or eight years. Due to the limited ability of individuals, it may not be all written correctly, so please read this article critically, which can be beneficial to your scientific research work.

Article Source:

https://blog.sciencenet.cn/home.php?mod=space&uid=58729