论文部分内容阅读
本文从“范式”概念出发,区分了科学研究中的两种创新方式,即累积式渐进和革命性突破,指出科学资助机构在依靠以寻求共识为特点的同行评议机制来遴选具有非共识特征的革命性创新研究项目中所面临的内在困境。美国国家科学基金会从设立小额探索性研究项目到支持变革性研究的政策变迁表明,科学资助机构不仅要进一步改进同行评议机制以有效甄别创新性研究项目,而且应鼓励科学家敢于提出创新性想法,并通过设立多学科联合资助项目和组织“采砂坑”研讨会机制等方式来系统地培育和支持创新性研究。
Based on the concept of “paradigm ”, this article distinguishes two kinds of innovation in scientific research, that is, gradual and revolutionary breakthroughs. It points out that in the process of relying on peer review mechanisms characterized by seeking consensus, Characteristics of the revolutionary innovation research project in the face of the inherent difficulties. The NSF's policy changes from setting up small-scale exploratory research projects to supporting transformative research show that scientific funding agencies should not only further improve peer review mechanisms to effectively screen for innovative research projects, but also encourage scientists to dare to come up with innovative ideas And systematically nurture and support innovative research through the establishment of multidisciplinary joint funding programs and the organization of “sand pits” seminars and mechanisms.