{"id":1726,"date":"2015-02-26T07:06:09","date_gmt":"2015-02-26T07:06:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/can-awarding-grants-to-early-career-researchers-change-the-face-of-science\/"},"modified":"2025-02-21T05:16:06","modified_gmt":"2025-02-21T05:16:06","slug":"can-awarding-grants-to-early-career-researchers-change-the-face-of-science","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/can-awarding-grants-to-early-career-researchers-change-the-face-of-science","title":{"rendered":"Can awarding grants to early career researchers change the face of science?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

\u201cWe\u2019ll never know what breakthroughs were missed because young investigators were not provided with the resources necessary to pursue unique ideas over the last 15 years.\u201d<\/em>
Andy Harris, a physician and a Republican representative from Maryland in Young, Brilliant, and Underfunded<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Innovation lies at the heart of academic research. However, one of the challenges academic research is grappling with is the bias against young researchers, which adversely affects scientific innovation and advancement. Early career researchers struggle to receive grants because granting committees are known to favor esteemed researchers. This trend is evident from the <\/span>increasing age at which researchers receive grants<\/a>: the average age at which researchers received their first major award from the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) in the year 1980 was 38, which increased to more than 45 by 2013. Moreover, the overall share of grant funding won by scientists younger than 36 withered from 5.6% in 1980 to just 1.2% in 2012. As a result, many young minds are forced to leave research and pursue other career avenues. \u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The extent of loss for science this brings can be gauged from a recently published study entitled \u201cAge And The Trying Out Of New Ideas.\u201d<\/a> Economists M. Packalen and J. Bhattacharya analyzed more than 20\u00a0million biomedical papers published over the past 70 years, and they found that young researchers are much more likely than older scientists to study exciting innovative topics and that senior researchers are more likely to publish in trending areas when they are supervising a younger scientist. Taking into account the contribution early career researchers can make to science, there is a need to address the difficulties they face in launching their academic careers. \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Andy Harris, a Republican congressional representative from Maryland and a physician, highlights the situation of young researchers in an editorial in the\u00a0New York Times<\/em> entitled, \u201cYoung, Brilliant, and Underfunded<\/a>.\u201d He mentions that of the $30 billion in federal funds that the National Institutes of Health receives to invest in biomedical research, most of the money goes to researchers who are esteemed in their fields, and sometimes, beyond the age when most scientists make their most important contributions to their fields. Some vital facts he points out<\/a> are:<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n