🏅 Call for Applications for the 2024 Emerging Public Policy Leadership Award. 🏅

Founded in 1947, in 2022 AIBS celebrates its 75th anniversary

"What news from the sea?"

The fish replied: "I have a lot to say, but my mouth is full of water." - Armenian proverb

The San Diego, California shoreline. Credit: Frank McKenna

A small semi-transparent triangle for visual interest
Science Marches On

News & Events

Explore the most recent news about AIBS's initiatives, programs, resources, and events.

Bullet peer-review · May 03, 2023

Gender Gap Found in Research Grant Award Amounts, Re-applications

According to a review of studies by researchers from Washington State University and the American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS), women researchers received less grant money on average than men. The study found that women's average grant award was about $342,000, while men's average grant award was $659,000.
Bullet peer-review · Aug 29, 2022

Is Peer Review Risk Averse?

The American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS) and Washington State University have published the results from an experiment of grant peer reviewers’ evaluations that suggest proposal risk dominates project assessment.
An icon of a paper airplane

Get the AIBS Newsletter

Our newsletter provides you with the very latest announcements & research from the world of biology, and updates automatically to reflect your personal interests. We also include news and events from AIBS & our 107 member societies. [Read about our data privacy.]

See an up-to-date example & subscribe 🗞 today!

Bullet peer-review · Mar 18, 2021

Is Grant Review Feedback Perceived as Fair or Useful?

AIBS published a study on research funding applicant perceptions of the effectiveness and appropriateness of peer review feedback. The results suggested that only 56–60% of applicants determined the feedback to be appropriate and less than 40% of applicants found the feedback to be very useful in improving future submissions. Some of these perceptions were dependent on race and gender, independent of funding success.
Bullet peer-review · May 19, 2020

AIBS Investigates Effectiveness of Panel Discussion

Often in the peer review of research grant proposals, panel discussion is used as a way to take advantage of a broader set of expertise and perspectives for making funding decisions. The American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS) has published findings exploring reviewer experiences with panel discussion and examining their perceived quality and effectiveness as well as their influence on scoring.

Bullet peer-review · Aug 01, 2019

AIBS Examines Peer Reviewer Levels of Participation and Motivations

AIBS published findings from an analysis of scientist participation levels in the grant peer review process, as well as their motivations to do so. These results, generated from a survey sent to over 13,000 scientists, show that while 76% of respondents participated in the peer review of research applications, an uneven distribution of participation was found across this sample, with a sub-set of reviewers shouldering higher review loads (the top 10% reviewing 3 times the amount of the bottom 40% of respondents). This sub-set was estimated to be close to maximum capacity in terms of review availability, highlighting concerns about the sustainability of the peer review system. However, most reviewer respondents indicated that participating in peer review has positively affected their careers, and that giving back to the scientific community is the most important motivation for reviewing.