Greenlighting Innovative Projects: How Evaluation Structure Shapes the Perceived Feasibility of Early-Stage Ideas
Open accessIntegrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Evaluating multiple criteria simultaneously can reduce the quality of assessment for each individual criterion in human reviewers.
“This pattern mirrors findings from human reviewers, where evaluating multiple criteria simultaneously can reduce the quality of assessment for each individual criterion (Lane et al., 2024).”
From FLAWS: A Benchmark for Error Identification and Localization in Scientific Papers (2025) · cites this paper as Lane et al., 2024
Cites
Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning
March, J. G. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71 · Cited by 21,942 · see citing works
The attention system of the human brain
Posner, M. I., & Petersen, S. E. (1990) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.ne.13.030190.000325 · Cited by 8,070 · see citing works
The specificity of the scientific field and the social conditions of the progress of reason
Bourdieu, P. (1975) · Social Science Information · doi:10.1177/053901847501400602 · Cited by 1,483 · see citing works
How Professors Think: Inside the Curious World of Academic Judgment
Lamont, M. (2009) · doi:10.4159/9780674054158 · Cited by 1,086 · see citing works
The Intellectual and Social Organization Of the Sciences
Whitley, R. (2000) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199240531.001.0001 · Cited by 1,076 · see citing works
Chance and Consensus in Peer Review
Cole, S., Cole, J. R., & Simon, G. A. (1981) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.7302566 · Cited by 623 · see citing works
Low agreement among reviewers evaluating the same NIH grant applications
Pier, E. L., Brauer, M., Filut, A., Kaatz, A., Raclaw, J., Nathan, M. J., Ford, C. E., & Carnes, M. (2018) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1714379115 · Cited by 210 · see citing works
Commensuration Bias in Peer Review
Lee, C. J. (2015) · Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1086/683652 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
FLAWS: A Benchmark for Error Identification and Localization in Scientific Papers
Xi, S., Rao, V., Payan, J., & Shah, N. B. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.21843
- Authors
- N. Lane, J., Friis, S., Cai, T., Menietti, M., Weber, G., & Guinan, E.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
- Venue
- SSRN Electronic Journal
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2024
- ISSN
- 1556-5068 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4393065064
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 8
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Multi-Criteria Decision Making
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
- Keywords
- multi-criteria decision making, feasibility assessment, evaluation bias, grant proposal evaluation, research funding decisions, implementation risks, innovation project selection, assessment rubrics
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
