It sounds like a good first step is to develop a reliable way of recognizing in retrospect what was in fact useful, and classifying research projects/publications that way.
Of course, this works better for short-term projects. A fifty-year longitudinal study on heritability of disease risk factors is hard to measure the usefulness of in less than fifty years.
It sounds like a good first step is to develop a reliable way of recognizing in retrospect what was in fact useful, and classifying research projects/publications that way.
This seems like a remarkably sound insight to me. I’m not sure why it hasn’t been upvoted more.
It sounds like a good first step is to develop a reliable way of recognizing in retrospect what was in fact useful, and classifying research projects/publications that way.
Of course, this works better for short-term projects. A fifty-year longitudinal study on heritability of disease risk factors is hard to measure the usefulness of in less than fifty years.
This seems like a remarkably sound insight to me. I’m not sure why it hasn’t been upvoted more.
Possible second step: Set up a prediction market.