01365nas a2200265   4500000000100000008004100001260001500042653001400057653001900071653002400090653002400114653002100138100001700159700002400176700001500200700001700215700002000232700001900252245011600271856004600387300000700433490000600440520063900446022001401085       2017                            d  c2017-12-0410aBlack box10aGrant proposal10aGrant review panels10aPeer review process10aResearch funding1 aJohn Coveney1 aDanielle L. Herbert1 aKathy Hill1 aKaren E. Mow1 aNicholas Graves1 aAdrian Barnett00a‘Are you siding with a personality or the grant proposal?’: observations on how peer review panels function  uhttps://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-017-0043-x  a190 v23 aIn Australia, the peer review process for competitive funding is usually conducted by a peer review group in conjunction with prior assessment from external assessors. This process is quite mysterious to those outside it. The purpose of this research was to throw light on grant review panels (sometimes called the ‘black box’) through an examination of the impact of panel procedures, panel composition and panel dynamics on the decision-making in the grant review process. A further purpose was to compare experience of a simplified review process with more conventional processes used in assessing grant proposals in Australia.  a2058-8615