For previous installments in our series, go to Sidestep These Application Missteps.
After covering must-avoids like proposing a weak project and misfiring on innovation, we now tackle another pitfall to sidestep: lack of focus in your hypothesis and Specific Aims.
For this article, we use the term "unfocused" rather than "weak" since the two are different.
"Weak" relates to a project's impact and significance. Though an application may be weak, it can still be focused.
"Unfocused" relates to the lack of a strong central hypothesis, which can be too broad (e.g., inflammation is a key etiological component of autoimmune diseases) or too descriptive (e.g., we will observe changes in transcriptional signatures in the involved tissues following infection).
Specific Aims can be unfocused if they lack specific goals and either overly describe or inadequately describe what the aim intends to accomplish.
Why Focus Is Key
To paraphrase a popular saying, your application is only as strong at its weakest link—and you certainly don't want that link to be either your hypothesis or your Specific Aims. One of our program officers explains why:
"An application with an unfocused central hypothesis or Specific Aims that won't rigorously test the underlying concepts will most likely not be discussed at review. These constitute the foundation of a project, so a lack of focus will strongly reduce reviewer enthusiasm for the project."—Alec Ritchie, Division of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (DMID)
Hypothetically Speaking
Coming up with a solid hypothesis for your application may be more challenging than you might think.
Not only should it be well-focused and testable (through your Specific Aims), but it has to be sound and important enough that reviewers believe your research will be able to make a high impact on its field.
With so much riding on your hypothesis, it's crucial you think carefully about it, considering whether it forms a solid foundation for your Specific Aims.
To gauge the quality of your hypothesis, Susan Brobst, a program officer in our Division of AIDS (DAIDS) gives you a starting point:
"Ask yourself: did I begin with a hypothesis then develop the aims and approach to address it? Or did I build the hypothesis around existing data and samples so it would fit what was available to me? The latter approach sometimes results in an unfocused hypothesis or the appearance of a 'data gathering' exercise."
What makes a good hypothesis
From the perspective of reviewers as well as our program and scientific review staff, the saying "you'll know it when you see it" could apply to a focused (strong) hypothesis. In other words, there's no easy way to explain what makes a hypothesis focused or not. That said, our experts provide some insight.
No comments:
Post a Comment