The Good Science Project
5) use the grant money to do a new round of experiments in which you pick the successful ones to be the basis for your next NIH request.
This is in large part because of the demand for preliminary data. A routine observation about NIH peer review is that everyone expects to see that your research has enough “preliminary data” to show that your future research will be likely to produce positive results.
For example, one NIH webpage advises that “when you’re crafting your grant application, high-quality preliminary data can make all the difference.” The webpage continues: “You must also assess whether or not your preliminary data are sufficient to convince reviewers that your project has a high likelihood of success.”
[All research needs a high likelihood of success? Compare that to this view from Nobel winner Robert Lefkowitz: “Science is 99 percent failure, and that's an optimistic view.”]
“Preliminary data are not required for the exploratory/developmental grant (R21) or small grant (R03) mechanisms. However, we’ve seen that most R21 applicants include preliminary data, and those who do typically enjoy greater success rates.”
