Dominant group/Funding

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search
An image of the business compartment shows a business conference. Credit: Bernhard Lehn.{{free media}}

Funding: sufficient income to cover costs, diversion of person-hours from a day job, and as an incentive to perform the research or exploration to overcome specified risks (hopefully).

Costs: intellectual effort, computer use time and resources, possible publication costs, a trip to a conference in a neat location.

The higher the risk of success, the closer to a gift the resource becomes. The lower the risk of success, the closer to an investment or loan usually with interest, the resource is.

Agency funding per year[edit]

This search is conducted using Google scholar with keywords "agency abbreviation" + "dominant group", e.g., NASA "dominant group", since 1999. For several of the funding agencies the key words used had to be the agency general title rather than the abbreviation: the Max Planck Institute - "Max Planck Institute" (MPI), "National Endowment for the Humanities" (NEH), "Office of Naval Research" (ONR), and "Canadian Space Agency" (CSA). "Satlantic" funded one paper in 2002 and may be a company. Notation such as "33 p 3" indicates 33 articles so far from pages 1-3 of the search.

Articles containing "dominant group" per funding agency per publication year.
Year NASA NSF MPI NIH NEH ONR CSA NSERC NOAA ESA USGS
2016 72 153 35 285 13 6 1 23 46 123 46
2015 84 165 34 292 21 5 0 22 54 101 30
2012 67 136 30 191 25 3 0 21 49 103 19
2011 47 105 15 155 12 3 0 7 34 47 16
2010 45 110 17 118 13 1 0 11 38 62 24
2009 58 105 23 126 18 1 0 13 29 57 19
2008 47 103 17 124 13 4 0 15 33 59 21
Total 420 877 171 1291 115 23 1 135 360 552 175

Abbreviations used stand for

  1. NASA - National Aeronautics and Space Administration, USA,
  2. NSF - National Science Foundation, USA,
  3. MPI - Max Planck Institute, Germany,
  4. NIH - National Institutes of Health, USA,
  5. NEH - National Endowment for the Humanities, USA,
  6. ONR - Office of Naval Research, USA,
  7. CSA - Canadian Space Agency, Canada,
  8. NSERC - Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, Canada,
  9. NOAA - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, USA,
  10. ESA - European Space Agency, European Union, and
  11. USGS - US Geological Survey, USA.

Additional funding agencies are, for example, the Boreskov Institute of Catalysis, the Getty Research Institute for the History of Art and the Humanities, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Max-Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, the Swiss Society for Humanities, the Netherlands Institute for Advanced Study in the Humanities and Social Sciences (NIAS), Arts and Humanities Research Council (UK), and the Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology.

European Space Agency[edit]

"Through this Call the Director of Science solicits from the broad scientific community proposals for the competitive selection of new "Science Ideas", to be investigated in terms of feasibility and needed technology developments."[1]

"Prospective proposers must submit a mandatory Letter of Intent (LoI) by the deadline indicated in the table reported above. Proposals not preceded by a corresponding LoI will not be considered. LoI submissions are accepted exclusively in electronic form, in PDF format, using the online submission form that can be accessed below or from the left-hand menu."[1]

Max Planck Institute for the History of Science[edit]

This institute as a possible funder is being studied. Another may be the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration[edit]

This may be a possibility. Current press releases include 20 uses of "dominant group".

National Endowment for the Humanities[edit]

  • National Endowment for the humanities - The Division of Research Programs encourages research and writing in all areas of the humanities, including the study of history, literature, philosophy, religion, and foreign cultures. Through grants to individual scholars and institutions, the division fosters work that enables Americans to understand the world. http://www.neh.gov/whoweare/divisions/Research/index.html. NEH has extensive interest in Darwin, Origin of species, and their influence. The Darwin interest does not appear in the listed grant programs offered.
Apply for a Grant, http://www.neh.gov/grants/index.html.
Still featured at the website is "Darwin the Young Adventurer"[2]. "Janet Browne is Aramont Professor of the History of Science at Harvard University and the author of the two-volume biography Charles Darwin: Voyaging (1995) and Charles Darwin: The Power of Place (2002), which received the National Book Critics Award and the Pfizer Prize for Biography from the British History of Science Society. From 1983 to 1991, Browne was associate editor of the Correspondence of Charles Darwin, where she studied more than 14,000 letters."[2]
Correspondence after 1859 have been searched, a definition of "dominant group" has been found.
Potential for help from Janet Browns has diminished due to discovery of term in work of Kirby in 1826 and unresponsiveness of Browne to email communication - possibly associated with then and upcoming holidays, plus university endeavors.
Although most grantees are associated with a university, there are "Independent Scholar"s and science museum and library employees. Being associated with Wikiversity may not be a drawback if expressed as a novel and open access approach to research and the research process.
  • The Division of Research Programs staff probably contains at least one potential program manager to be sent a letter of interest:
  1. Jane Aikin, Director of the Division of Research Programs, jaikin@neh.gov, attending 128th Convention of the Modern Language Association,
  2. Russell Wyland, Deputy Director, rwyland@neh.gov,
  3. Jason Boffetti, Senior Program Officer (SPO), jboffetti@neh.gov, attending the American Political Science Association Annual Meeting,
  4. John Cox, SPO, jcox@neh.gov,
  5. Claudia Kinkela, SPO, ckinkela@neh.gov, attending the American Political Science Association Annual Meeting,
  6. Mary Macklem, SPO, mmacklem@neh.gov,
  7. Ann Meyer, SPO, ameyer@neh.gov,
  8. Daniel Sack, SPO, dsack@neh.gov, attending joint Annual Meeting of the American Historical Association/American Society of Church History,
  9. Mark Silver, SPO, msilver@neh.gov,
  10. Stefanie Walker, SPO, swalker@neh.gov, attending College Art Association conference (CAA), no written differentiation with respect to program areas is given.

The department "In the Field: Research Programs" contains a list of SPOs attending conferences that suggests areas of interest or expertise.

"All applicants to National Endowment for the Humanities are required to use Grants.gov."[3]

"The [US] federal government has mandated that all federal government grant-making agencies use Grants.gov as their primary way of receiving grant applications."[3]

Prior to a successful registration on Grants.gov, an individual or organization/company/insitution must register with the US federal government's System for Award Management (SAM) at SAM.

A successful registration at SAM is in turn predicated upon appropriate recognition by the US Internal Revenue Service (IRS) within SAM. This process may take up to a week and is fraught with conceptual potholes, although each website seeks improvement through user surveys.

If you register as an organization, sole proprietorship, or company (profit-making or not-for-profit) you likely need a DUNS number. Registering only as an individual may limit your grant-seeking opportunities.

If you already have a DUNS number but your input into SAM keeps coming back with an error message, words to the effect, that you inputted the DUNS number correctly but the name, address, and additional information does not match the Dun & Bradstreet, Inc., record, try checking their listing using iUpdate.

National Institutes of Health[edit]

  • National Institutes of Health - Wikipedia. One limitation on funding from NIH is that usually at least one principal investigator must be an MD. Basic scientific research is usually redirected to NSF.

National Science Foundation[edit]

NSF Home url=http://www.nsf.gov/index.jsp.
Search of NSF website produced the following results:
  1. "But between the latest Devonian Period and the subsequent Carboniferous period, placoderms disappeared and ray-finned fishes rapidly replaced lobe-finned fishes as the dominant group, a demographic shift that persists to today."[4] This usage is in research efforts of Geosciences and Biology (Paleontology).
  2. "The dominant group is using a subordinate group’s ethnicity for their own entertainment."[5], under the heading "Problem with Mascots"[5]. This is in Ethnicity.
  3. "The next society will be a knowledge society. Knowledge will be its key resource, and knowledge workers will be the dominant group in its workforce."[6] Sociology and society are the focus.
  • Applicants proposing research in the social or behavioral sciences, linguistics, or economics are encouraged to consider the funding programs of the National Science Foundation’s Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences at http://nsf.gov/dir/index.jsp?org=sbe.

Linguistics Program[edit]

"The program supports research on the syntactic, semantic, morphological, phonetic, and phonological properties of individual languages and of language in general. The Linguistics Program ... encourages investigation of linguistic questions that are interdisciplinary in nature ... social and cultural factors in language use, variation, and change".[7]

With respect to "dominant group" and possibly its relative synonyms, paraphrasing the NSF program statement: "[t]he program [may] support research on the syntactic [and] semantic ... investigation of linguistic questions that are interdisciplinary in nature ... [including] social and cultural factors in [dominant group] use, variation, and change."

From an apparent origin in William Kirby's book with William Spence: An introduction to Entomology: or Elements of the Natural History of Insects, Volume IV of 1826, as an expression of Hutchinsonian natural creation theory, the technical term "dominant group", has traveled forward in time. Charles Darwin incorporated it into his On the origin of the species by means of natural selection: or, The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life in 1859. Thomas Henry Huxley coined the term Darwinism, and Joseph Fisher, among others included social darwinism as a part of evolutionary progressivism (eugenics) in the 1870s. Having survived these theories of evolution, it is now part of George Gaylord Simpson's modern evolutionary synthesis from the 1940s to present.

The term seems to have radiated out of the entomology of 1826 into political science as part of Alexis de Tocqueville's The Old Regime and the Revolution: Notes on the French Revolution and Napoleon between 1853-1857. And, has since diversified into nearly every professional scientific, cultural, social, and linguistic niche, including high energy physics.

It is a technical term that may have origins in religion even before Kirby's use. It seems to have either a rigorous definition in sociology or a general, somewhat vague metadefinition, allowing its use almost ubiquitously in professional scholarly literature.

  1. Intellectual Merit: "How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields? How well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to conduct the project? (If appropriate, the reviewer will comment on the quality of prior work.) To what extent does the proposed activity suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts? How well conceived and organized is the proposed activity? Is there sufficient access to resources?"[8]
  2. Broader Impacts: "How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training, and learning? How well does the proposed activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)? To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks, and partnerships? Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding? What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to society?"[8]

Science, Technology, and Society[edit]

"The Science, Technology, and Society (STS) program supports research that uses historical, philosophical, and social scientific methods to investigate the intellectual, material, and social facets of the scientific, technological, engineering and mathematical (STEM) disciplines. It encompasses a broad spectrum of STS topics including interdisciplinary studies of ethics, equity, governance, and policy issues that are closely related to STEM disciplines, including medical science."[9]

"The program’s review process is approximately six months. It includes appraisal of proposals by ad hoc reviewers selected for their expertise and by an advisory panel that meets twice a year. The deadlines for the submission of proposals are February 2nd for proposals to be funded as early as July, and August 3rd for proposals to be funded in or after January."[9]

Current solicitation: 15-506

Who May Submit Proposals:

  1. Standard Research Grants and Grants for Collaborative Research: US Academic Institutions and Non-Profit Research Organizations.
  2. Scholars Awards: US Academic Institutions and Independent Scholars

"Scholars Awards are normally made to U.S. academic institutions, although an individual who is not affiliated with an appropriate U.S. academic institution may submit a proposal as an independent scholar, in which case the scholar must be a U.S. citizen or national, or have permanent resident status."[10]

"Full proposals submitted via FastLane: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the general guidelines contained in the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG). The complete text of the GPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg. Paper copies of the GPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf.gov. Proposers are reminded to identify this program solicitation number in the program solicitation block on the NSF Cover Sheet For Proposal to the National Science Foundation. Compliance with this requirement is critical to determining the relevant proposal processing guidelines. Failure to submit this information may delay processing."[10]

"Full proposals submitted via Grants.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation via Grants.gov should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov. The complete text of the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: (http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp? ods_key=grantsgovguide). To obtain copies of the Application Guide and Application Forms Package, click on the Apply tab on the Grants.gov site, then click on the Apply Step 1: Download a Grant Application Package and Application Instructions link and enter the funding opportunity number, (the program solicitation number without the NSF prefix) and press the Download Package button. Paper copies of the Grants.gov Application Guide also may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf.gov."[10]

"Letters of Intent: Not required, Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not required".[10]

"The Program encourages potential investigators with questions as to whether their proposal fits the goals of the program to contact one of the program officers."[10]

Social Psychology Program[edit]

"The Social Psychology Program at NSF supports basic research on human social behavior, including cultural differences and development over the life span.

Among the many research topics supported are: attitude formation and change, social cognition, personality processes, interpersonal relations and group processes, the self, emotion, social comparison and social influence, and the psychophysiological and neurophysiological bases of social behavior.

The scientific merit of a proposal depends on four important factors: (1) The problems investigated must be theoretically grounded. (2) The research should be based on empirical observation or be subject to empirical validation. (3) The research design must be appropriate to the questions asked. (4) The proposed research must advance basic understanding of social behavior."[11] This program is a part of "Psychological and Language Sciences".[11]

Letter of intent[edit]

A letter of intent is part of the application process to a funding agency directed to a specific program manager after exchange of initial communication to determine interest of the program manager in the project's subject, goals, and possible significance.

Letter of interest[edit]

A letter of interest to a program manager at the United States National Science Foundation (NSF) is written and sent to politely ascertain whether there is sufficient interest in a proposal topic on the part of the program manager to warrant the submission of a formal proposal through the FastLane system.

Points of interest[edit]

The concept embodied by the two-word scientific term dominant group may be primordial to human society, culture, and language. Searching context and usage of the term and its relative synonyms in contemporary and extinct languages, and those languages on the verge of extinction may reveal important facts about this concept. It is sometimes the case that a language is on the verge of extinction precisely because of the presence of a dominant group, especially one engaging in monopolistic or oligopolistic practices.

Dominant group may represent a force for extinction in the evolution and application of language, specifically terminology, to the real and imaginary world. A more readable version may be found at [:http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Dominant_group/Funding].

Intellectual merit[edit]

The current activity is exploratory in nature and is resulting in an advance of knowledge and understanding about the term dominant group and its uses within various fields. The identification of its own field may result; thereby, in allowing differentiation of other fields so as to determine how knowledge is advanced across those different fields. It's like differential equations. Although differential equations is a subject within mathematics, it's spread to other subjects such as physics with ensuing use advances knowledge within physics. Differential equations is a two-word scientific term.

Advancing knowledge and understanding[edit]

The proposed activity consists of finding the origin of dominant group or one of its relative synonyms, defining the two-word scientific/technical term perhaps from context (lexical pragmatics) (or perhaps rigorously), determining why scientists outside biology (especially evolution or entomology) use the term, and verifying its divergence and radiance by examples.

The field of dominant group appears to be regions, or the science of regions. Within a region in any science, including the social sciences, there may be a dominant group. Each region is defined by its limits. These limits in turn may allow for a dominant group. Change the limits (characteristics) for any region and the dominant group may go extinct. If a regional genome in biology lacks the potency to take advantage of any change in regional characteristics, there will be no dominant biological group.

In each field of use[edit]

Part of the proposed activity is to determine how dominant group advances knowledge and understanding within each field which may be considered its own field or across all these different fields.

Dominant group is already being used as a scientific/technical term to advance knowledge and understanding across a great many fields.

In theory, dominant group in any field may have at least two uses: (1) a group of field-based entities, sources, or objects, or (2) a dominant group in some way associated with that field.

In practice, depending upon the scientist's intent, dominant group may be the bad group that engages in monopolistic practices, or socially negative behavior such as discrimination, abuse, punishment, and additional possible criminal activity against other demographic groups.

It can also serve as an empirical identifier in observations. At one extreme, it is 100 % of the effect or phenomenon under study. At the other, it is a minority group effect that perhaps has some natural or artificial unfair advantage. In a society a dominant group often has an unfair advantage such as numbers, military power, or assets and money. Here's an example of how searching and using the power of the internet can bring about remarkable discoveries.

In an article that appeared in the American Scientist (May-June 2012) issue entitled "Herschel and the Puzzle of Infra-red", "Jack White mentions that it is not known who coined the term "infrared.""[12] "A Google Books search for "infra-red" finds two articles published in April 1874, both of which use the term in the context of Edmond Bacquerel's treatise on light."[12] There is an 1867 work using the French infra-rouge and one in English near the same time using "infra-red", "having translated it from the French."[12]

The author responds that "ultra red" and "infra-red" appear in a paper from 1873, researched in 1960 "in the dark ages before the Internet. Rosenberg's find is a reminder of the Internet's amazing, growing power to search original works in different languages."[13]

Evolution[edit]

The term dominant group and perhaps the concept the term represents has been an integral part of nearly every theory of evolution.

Hypothesis: As an evolutionary process, a dominant group may be a force for extinction by driving a number of groups to extinction and a force for speciation when spatial or temporal dispersion creates diversity and isolation which may eventually produce new groups. As a force for extinction a particular dominant group may also through its actions on other groups ultimately produce its own extinction event. This departure from a zone then allows other groups to fill the niche.

Changes in the characteristics or properties of a region may force the dominant group into extinction; thereby, making room for the next dominant group. However, some changes may not allow a dominant group to emerge. Additionally, properties of dominance may be appearance only. No competition for resources may have occurred.

Lexical pragmatics[edit]

From a metadefinitional point of view each use of dominant group has a relationship between members of the dominant group, a population from which the dominant group is a subset, a criterion for dominance, and a region, range, distribution or "in their own country". But, each of these four structures may have their meaning in the context within which the author or speaker places the two-word scientific/technical term.

Proposer qualifications[edit]

Much of the explorational data for reviewer evaluation sits within the resource structure and substructure of the dominant group research project displayed in the template entitled "Dominant group" near the bottom of this page.

Initial efforts using the scientific method may be found within the effort to demonstrate proof of concept.

Transformative concepts[edit]

"[T]wo-word glossary items are the most common technical terms".[14] Dominant group is a likely two-word glossary item captured by data mining algorithms. A first-principle's demonstration that dominant group is a two-word scientific/technical term yields one test standard for data mining algorithms to find.

Dominant group serves as an indicator that original research has been conducted, especially when it appears in a primary source.

As a two-word scientific/technical term, is dominant group a member of the dominant group of two-word scientific/technical terms?

This exploratory investigation into dominant group and its usage has the potential to demonstrate that dominant group

  1. when identified is a causative force for change that by its nature requires further investigation,
  2. should be no longer used as a scientific/technical term because its meanings are unclear and vague, or
  3. identifies an inhibiting or moderating force that works against 'high-risk, high-reward' "research with an inherent high degree of uncertainty and the capability to produce a major impact on important problems in biomedical/behavioral research"[15], or in other scientific/technical fields.

Conception and organization[edit]

This exploratory effort uses the template system (the dominant group template is near the bottom of this page) to organize and keep readily available the efforts already begun and those still needed.

Access to resources[edit]

Part of the challenge of this type of experimental inquiry is that authors of today or even in the 1800s are likely to use dominant group to describe the past when the term itself was actually not used by an earlier author.

University level access, including its medial research center, (both of which are available local to the principal investigator, PI) to much earlier original documents may be required to confirm the term earlier than 1826, its current date of specific use in English by Kirby. Local availability for interlibrary loan of needed resources also exists.

As Google scholar, for example, displays older and older manuscripts or books, especially before 1826, the probability increases of finding the term or eliminating its use by specific authors.

Web-based resources (including e-mail) are available to the PI.

Broader impacts[edit]

Exploring modern languages, languages on the verge of extinction, and extinct languages for terms that are either relative or exact synonyms (translations) for dominant group advances discovery and raises awareness of meaning and terminology.

For example: "In January 2008, a coalition of over 40 civil society groups endorsed a statement of principles[16] calling for precautionary action related to nanotechnology."[17] "The group has urged action based on eight principles. They are 1) A Precautionary Foundation 2) Mandatory Nano-specific Regulations 3) Health and Safety of the Public and Workers 4) Environmental Protection 5) Transparency 6) Public Participation 7) Inclusion of Broader Impacts and 8) Manufacturer Liability."[17]

"Nanomedicines are just beginning to enter drug regulatory processes, but within a few decades could comprise a dominant group within the class of innovative pharmaceuticals, the current thinking of government safety and cost-effectiveness regulators appearing to be that these products give rise to few if any nano-specific issues.[18]"[17] Bold added.

Advancing discovery and training[edit]

"Ethnocide is when a dominant political group attempts to purposely put an end to a people’s traditional way of life. Linguicide (linguistic genocide) is when such a dominant group tries to extinguish the language of a minority group, say by punishing anyone caught speaking it."[19] Exploring the meaning and use of dominant group in such context increases understanding of the forces at work characterized by the terms inclusion.

Underrepresented group participation[edit]

The proposed activity is ongoing at Wikiversity.

"Wikiversity is a Wikimedia Foundation project devoted to learning resources, learning projects, and research for use in all levels, types, and styles of education from pre-school to university, including professional training and informal learning. We invite teachers, students, and researchers to join us in creating open educational resources and collaborative learning communities. To learn more about Wikiversity, try a guided tour or start editing now."[20]

Infrastructure enhancement[edit]

Information may be made available in various venues:

  1. databases or contributions to other databases of all institutions, agencies, and individuals who manage similar databases,
  2. contributions to ongoing network analyses, and
  3. information sharing and access.[21]

Wikiversity is the premier online research and education database, facility, network and partnership of the WMF. That the proposed activity is ongoing at Wikiversity makes the information generated available through access and sharing.

"Just as an FYI, Wikiversity has been placed among the 'top picks' for this Google+ education list. It has been shared over 2000 times since its original posting.Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; invalid names, e.g. too many"

The proposed activity would partner NSF with Wikiversity to enhance the infrastructure for research and education, including where possible, facilities, instrumentation, and networks within Wikiversity and between Wikiversity and NSF.

Broad dissemination[edit]

Dominant group is an ongoing original research project that is being open-sourced here at Wikiversity both as a learning resource and to yield the broadest possible dissemination.

Benefits to society[edit]

"Dominant group(s)", designated vaguely by the term, and the associated ideologies of exclusion, serve as apparent focused power structures that increase existing disparities in wealth and status, while marginalizing or disenfranchising "Others".[21]

This proposed activity explores the two-word term "dominant group" to increase awareness of what dominant groups are linguistically as well as socially and scientifically. As the original research effort is ongoing at Wikiversity it benefits all audiences that explore learning through Wikiversity. A successful collaboration between NSF and Wikiversity helps to disseminate the societal benefits of NSF to any local community where some access to the internet and computer terminals in various forms exists such as at pre-schools, elementary and secondary schools, high schools and universities.

Dominant group is a two-word term that occurs at least once in some 270 English Wikipedia entries. These usages may be original research, plagiarism, copyright violations, properly cited uses, or simply mistakes in usage by editors and contributors. Or, dominant group because of its long history may have become a commonly used two-word term that crosses the barrier between common language words that are in a dictionary and the scientific/technical vocabulary of specialists, scholars, and experts. On the general web as sampled by Google, dominant group yields about 513,000 results. Many of these relate right back to the ongoing research at Wikiversity or to the earlier dominant group entries on Wikipedia that were deleted as being original research.

As a potential indicator of copyright violation, dominant group may serve to help improve major web-based resources such as Wikipedia. On Wikipedia dominant group occurs in some 270 entries and as a split term such as dominant ethnic group in some 15,700 entries. Overall the English Wikipedia contains some 4,014,000 entries.

Articles or presentations of the research outside Wikiversity will be prepared openly here at Wikiversity as a teaching and training resource. Publication of such resources in open-access journals or scientific society journals benefits multiple audiences.

Before the benefits of the term and its relative synonyms is assessed, there is a need for some form of control group to serve as comparison. It should be noted that the two-word scientific term control group is a synonym of dominant group.

Hypotheses[edit]

  1. Funding for original research into the origin and radiation of dominant grooup to most fields of research may be difficult to justify because of its minority popularity.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. 1.0 1.1 Luigi Colangeli (9 February 2016). "ANNOUNCEMENT OF OPPORTUNITY FOR NEW SCIENCE IDEAS IN ESA'S SCIENCE PROGRAMME". ESTEC, The Netherlands (TBC): European Space Agency. Retrieved 2016-02-10.
  2. 2.0 2.1 Janet Browne (May/June 2009). "Darwin the Young Adventurer". Humanities 30 (3). http://www.neh.gov/news/humanities/2009-05/Darwin.html. Retrieved 2011-10-28. 
  3. 3.0 3.1 NEH (April 22, 2013). "Frequently Asked Questions about NEH on Grantsdotgov". 1100 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20506: National Endowment for the Humanities. Retrieved 2013-04-22.
  4. Cheryl Dybas and Robert Mitchum (May 17, 2010). "Prehistoric Fish Extinction Paved the Way for Modern Vertebrates". Arlington, Virginia, USA: National Science Foundation. Retrieved 2011-12-13.
  5. 5.0 5.1 Richard Regan (16 November 2011). "Beyond Feathers and Leathers American Indian and Alaska Native Stereotypes" (PDF). Arlington, Virginia, USA: National Science Foundation. Retrieved 2011-12-13.
  6. Joseph Bordogna (November 13, 2001). ""Innovation: Future Perfect"". Arlington, Virginia, USA: National Science Foundation. Retrieved 2011-12-13.
  7. Joan Maling (July 15, 2011). "Linguistics". 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230, USA: The National Science Foundation. Retrieved 2011-12-13.
  8. 8.0 8.1 NSF (August 17, 2011). "Chapter III - NSF Proposal Processing and Review". Arlington, Virginia, USA: The National Science Foundation. Retrieved 2012-01-27.
  9. 9.0 9.1 Frederick Kronz and Wenda Bauchspies (2 February 2016). "Science, Technology, and Society (STS)". 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230, USA: The National Science Foundation. Retrieved 2016-02-07.
  10. 10.0 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 Frederick Kronz and Wenda Bauchspies (2 February 2015). "Program Solicitation NSF 15-506" (PDF). 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230, USA: The National Science Foundation. Retrieved 2016-02-07.
  11. 11.0 11.1 Kellina Craig-Henderson (May 23, 2011). "Social Psychology". 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230, USA: The National Science Foundation. Retrieved 2011-12-13.
  12. 12.0 12.1 12.2 Gary Rosenberg (September-October 2012). "Infrared Dating, In: Letters to the Editor". American Scientist 100 (5): 355. http://online.qmags.com/AMS17717438?sessionID=46B02956BEE440ED324FF282F&cid=1902739&eid=17438#pg5&mode2. Retrieved 2012-08-16. 
  13. Jack White (September-October 2012). "Mr. White responds, In: Letters to the Editor". American Scientist 100 (5): 355. http://online.qmags.com/AMS17717438?sessionID=46B02956BEE440ED324FF282F&cid=1902739&eid=17438#pg5&mode2. Retrieved 2012-08-16. 
  14. Youngja Park, Roy J Byrd and Branimir Boguraev (2002). Automatic Glossary Extraction: Beyond Terminology Identification, In: "Proceedings of the Nineteenth International Conference on Computational Linguistics" (PDF). Morristown, New Jersey. pp. 772–8. Retrieved 2012-03-05.
  15. Austin, F.C. (2008). High-Risk High-Reward Research Demonstration Project, presentation given to the NIH Council of Councils. Available at: http://dpcpsi.nih.gov/pdf/CoC-112008-Austin-HRHR.pdf
  16. Principles for the Oversight of Nanotechnologies and Nanomaterials. International Center for Technology Assessment. 2008. http://www.icta.org/global/actions.cfm?page=15&type=366&topic=8. 
  17. 17.0 17.1 17.2 "Regulation of nanotechnology". San Francisco, California: Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. May 9, 2010. Retrieved 2012-08-27.
  18. Vines T and Faunce TA Assessing the safety and cost-effectiveness of early nanodrugs Journal of Law and Medicine 2007; 16: 822-845
  19. Thomas N. Headland (2003). Thirty Endangered Languages in the Philippines, In: Work Papers of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, University of North Dakota Session (PDF). 47. Toledo-Cebu: Philippine Tourism. p. 12. Retrieved 2012-08-08.
  20. "Wikiversity:Main Page". San Francisco, California: Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. April 28, 2012. Retrieved 2012-06-22.
  21. 21.0 21.1 William Doelle (August 2011). Proposal Submitted to NSF Archaeology Program by: Center for Desert Archaeology. archaeologysouthwest.org. http://www.archaeologysouthwest.org/pdf/research_priority_supporting_edge_of_salado_cover.pdf. Retrieved 2012-01-29. 

External links[edit]

{{Economics resources}}