Federal support of basic research: Some economic issues

Summary There is no necessary connection between leadership in basic science and leadership in the applications of science, because scientific progress is a cooperative endeavour and not a competitive game; indeed, there may be a conflict between basic research and applied science. The notion of a position of leadership; in science raises questions of what leadership consists in and what its value is to the nation. The two main arguments for government support of science are cultural-social, and economic. The cultural-social argument stresses scientific activity as a form of social consumption of wealth and raises the question of whether other uses of the resources employed would contribute more to the greatness of the society. The economic argument stresses basic scientific research as a form of investment for the future, and raises the questions of what the rate of return on such investment is and whether and to what extent government support is called for. Relevant economic research results bearing on this problem are scarce. Economic theory suggests that competition in the market will supply less than the optimal amount of basic research; but our society substantially supplements the market through private contributions to and government support of science, and the question is whether this supplementation is deficient or excessive. Here difficult problems arise, on which more economic research is needed; one of these concerns the relative merits of government and private support of science. The rule-of-thumb procedures generally recommended for determining the volume and allocation of government support to basic scientific research generally ignore these problems, and amount to endorsing the present level of government support or recommending that it be increased. Allocation of federal support of science should take account of the possibility of stimulating the economic development of poor regions of the country by locating scientific research facilities in them.     

Medical journals and effective dissemination of health research

Clinical medical journals have not been effective in meeting the information needs of practitioners and bridging the gap between clinical research and practice. The slow adoption of results of clinical research is at least partly due to the failure of clinical journals to disseminate information in a way that would motivate practitioners to change practice. Although implementation is primarily a local process, medical journals are in a unique position to advance implementation by modifying their focus and adjusting their contents. Strategies that may be useful include publication of pre‐appraised evidence summaries and ‘clinical bottom‐lines’ and giving importance to systematic reviews and large evaluative research articles as they represent higher levels of evidence and have greater potential to change practice. Clinical journals should encourage researchers to consider how and by whom the findings will be used and provide information on implications for implementation such as possible strategies that may work, cost‐effectiveness, side‐effects and potential barriers to implementation. Medical journal publishers should explore ways to cooperate so that findings of landmark clinical trials could be shared thus reducing the ‘scatter’ of medical information. Electronic media offers numerous advantages such as quick accessibility and linking of information, and medical journals should capitalize on such innovations. There is a paradigm shift in health care practice as evidence is consciously and explicitly incorporated into individual patient care. Medical journals need to change to reflect this change in practice and provide practitioners with valid and relevant information.     

Effects of administrative scheduling and directions upon student ratings of instruction

Using temporal proximity of instructor/course evaluations to critical in-course events, together with psychological set provided via directions, the present investigation sought to assess (1) the appropriateness of within-course time-series analyses for instructor ratings, and (2) the potency of inducing rater perceptions of the rating process as an interactive variable in course evaluations. A 2 × 2 (temporal proximity by psychological set) factorial design used students enrolled in two sections of an undergraduate course in educational psychology as subjects. Using both midterm and final examination time periods as data collection points, the results of this investigation suggested that preexamination instructor/course evaluations tend to be more favorable than postexamination evaluations, and that a specific positive psychological set prior to evaluations tends to produce more favorable evaluations than very general, brief instructions.     

The concept of “model” and educational research

Models have played an important role in the development of the physical sciences. Perhaps their role in educational research will be even more important.