From: Joi ito Sent: Wednes ay, ay , 2018 3:38 PM To: Jeffrey Epstein Subject: Re: Researchers can't evaluate novel ideas I can talk at 5PM ET for 30 min if you're free (will be in car). > On May 16, 2018, at 11:27, jeffrey E. <[email protected]> wrote: > No , Paris after 4 eastern > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 5:23 PM Joi ito M=.> wrote: > What time zone are you in? Can you talk at 1PM ET? > On May 16, 2018, at 10:35, jeffrey E. <[email protected]> wrote: > > > can talk when you like > > > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 1:19 PM Joi ito [email protected]> wrote: > https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/mnsc.2015.2285 > > » Looking Across and Looking Beyond the Knowledge Frontier: » =ntellectual Distance, Novelty, and Resource Allocation in Science > > > Selecting among alternative projects is a core management task in =11 innovating organizations. In this paper, we focus on the evaluation =f frontier scientific research projects. We argue that the =E2 intellectual distance" between the knowledge embodied =n research proposals and an evaluator's own expertise =ystematically relates to the evaluations given. To estimate =elationships, we designed and executed a grant proposal process at a =eading research university in which we randomized the assignment of =valuators and proposals to generate 2,130 evaluator—proposal =airs. We find that evaluators systematically give lower scores to =esearch proposals that are closer to their own areas of expertise and =o those that are highly novel. The patterns are consistent with biases =ssociated with boundedly rational evaluation of new ideas. The patterns =re inconsistent with intellectual distance simply contributing =E2 noise" or being associated with private interests of =valuators. We discuss implications for policy, managerial intervention, =nd allocation of resources in the ongoing accumulation of scientific =nowledge. > > > > > > > > -- > > please note > The information contained in