Nohad A. Toulan School of Urban Studies and Planning
Date of Publication
Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in Urban Studies
Urban Studies and Planning
College teachers -- Research grants -- Statistics, Science – Finance, National Institutes of Health (U.S.)
1 online resource (vii, 128 pages)
This study examines the criteria which help academics receive National Institute of Health funds (NIH). The study covers 3,092 NIH recipients and non-recipients in the same department or institute at twenty-four universities. The universities are drawn from those below the top twenty in terms of receipt of NIH funds. With regards to performance, non- recipients have lower performance than recipients. A key determinant of the receipt of NIH funds is individual performance, as measured by the number of articles published and average citations per article in the two years immediately prior to the grant application. Professors receive more NIH money than do associates and assistant professors. Other positive contributors are the field of study, whether the academic has both a PhD. and Medical degree, and has licensed an innovation, been involved in the start of a new business and patented an invention through the university. To the extent that individual performance criteria represent the quality of the research proposal, allocation of NIH funds is based on merit.
A Tobit model indicates that being highly cited does not guarantee increasing returns. Likewise, career citations have only a small statistically significant impact. In addition, a negative coefficient associated with the second derivatives of both articles published in 2006-07 and their associated citations indicate diminishing marginal returns.
Kline, James Jeffrey, "Star Academics: Do They Garner Increasing Returns?" (2016). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 2713.