In This Issue ...

Grantsmanship 101 kicks off FY22 RD program

• June 21: Understanding Funders & Funding, noon-1 pm
• August 5: Planning a Competitive Grant Proposal, noon-1 pm

• August 18: NSF Major Research Instrumentation (MRI) grants, noon-1 pm (limited submission; internal competition will be held Fall 2021)
• September 17: NIH S10 Instrumentation Grants, noon-1:30 pm (Call for Intent to Submit is expected Feb/March 2022)

NSF announces Proposal Guide changes

• A new section covering requests for reasonable accommodations regarding the proposal process or for accessibility accommodations to access NSF’s electronic systems, websites and other digital content;
• Increasing biosketch page limits from two to three pages; 
• Updates to the current and pending support section of proposals to require that details are provided to help NSF and reviewers assess overlap/duplication;
• Adding planning proposals and Career-Life Balance supplemental funding requests as new proposal types;
• Updates to travel proposals will require AORs to certify that prior to the proposer’s participation in the meeting for which NSF travel support is being requested, the proposer will assure that the meeting organizer has a written policy or code-of-conduct addressing harassment.

Register for MICHR's 2021 Mock Study Section

MICHR's annual Mock Study Section is an opportunity to learn how NIH grant reviewers, or “study sections,” think. As one of six grant reviewers participants will discuss actual twelve-page K and R grants (already submitted in some version to the NIH). Learn what happens behind the closed doors in a real K or R grant review. This true-to-life simulation will take place October 5, 3-5:30 pm.

This event is ideal for fellows and early career faculty who are writing career development and R01 grants. It simulates an NIH Study Section in every detail. Participants will be assigned a grant to review in either clinical and translational research or health services research.

Learn more and register

The pitfall of self-plagiarism

Rachel Wallace, PhD, Research Development Officer, OVPR

Researchers communicate the same information about their work in many different formats–publications, grant proposals, conference posters, etc. However, recycling text verbatim is generally discouraged and may in fact be labeled “self-plagiarism.”

Plagiarism is a sensitive and serious topic in academia, and researchers and editors often go to great lengths to avoid the perception of misconduct. Despite this, forcing authors to rewrite their own words, if only to avoid plagiarism detection software, can sometimes cause more harm than good. Some researchers spend decades working on the same topic with similar experimental methods across studies; they should be able communicate their work as clearly and accurately as possible. Rewriting may not allow for the best description of the research and can mislead about the novelty of the work.

Ethical questions aside, reusing text from journal publications raises issues of copyright infringement because publishers, not the authors, usually own the copyright. There may be exceptions for reusing text under “fair use” in copyright law, but authors should consult journal editors and legal experts and refer to their contract with the journal.
 
Attempting to provide guidance on these issues, Cary Moskovitz (Duke) created the Text Recycling Research Project (TRRP). The TRRP contains advice and resources for researchers on reusing text ethically and transparently in a variety of contexts. The project addresses issues such as recycling text from unpublished work (e.g., proposals, posters); repeating experimental methods across publications; and copying language across papers without the same author list. Based on the TRRP, Evan Kharasch (Duke) launched a new editorial policy in Anesthesiology allowing authors to reuse text if they cite the original source.

Read more:

• Cathleen O'Grady, Science, "When is 'self-plagiarism' OK?", 25 June, 2021.
• Ian G. Anson & Cary Moskovitz, Accountability in Research, "Text recycling in STEM: A text-analytic study of recently published research articles," 24 Nov 2020.
• Michael Pemberton, Susanne Hall, Cary Moskovitz & Chris M. Anson, Learned Publishing, "Text recycling: Views of North American journal editors from an interview-based study," 3 Sept 2019.

Internal Funding 

​All currently open U-M campus-wide internal funding programs are posted in Research Commons.

• OVPR Limited Submissions Policies and Procedures
• Medical School Limited Submissions Homepage
• Questions: UMORlimitedsubmissions@umich.edu

• U-M Library’s Research Funding & Grants Guide or PIVOT Database
• U-M Research Development 
• U-M Foundation Relations

Conducting & Obtaining Valid Informed Consent

Finding Grant Funding

Storytelling via #SciArt: Telling Stories via Science Films

American Geophysical Union (AGU)

SciVal: Showcasing strengths

Engaging Policymakers Workshop

SciVal: Identify research trends

Communicating Science & Public Engagement Fundamentals

SciVal: Competitive intelligence