2019 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2019)

[Kenniz]

A drop of 20.2 points is super hurting... did you try to complain to the NCP or somewhere else for your 2018 application?

Wish you will get it this year!

The 20.2 drop in 2018 is not ringing alarm bells?

Yeah, it's enough proof to believe that is a complete lottery. Indeed, the external auditor told us that we should've gone for a REDRESS process as it clearly demonstrated that there is no consistency in the review process. This person also explained that every year, a high percentage of reviewers are new and have little or no experience in evaluating MSCA proposals.

It is a drop of 16.6 not 20.2 (if below 70 this time it could potentially be 20.7+) . As mentioned earlier I Strongly believe that resubmission Leads to heavy bias by reviewer as they directly see the application was rejected the last time (but not by how much) so they 100% tend to grade lower.

[IF ST LIF]

A drop of 20.2 points is super hurting... did you try to complain to the NCP or somewhere else for your 2018 application?

Wish you will get it this year!

The 20.2 drop in 2018 is not ringing alarm bells?

Yeah, it's enough proof to believe that is a complete lottery. Indeed, the external auditor told us that we should've gone for a REDRESS process as it clearly demonstrated that there is no consistency in the review process. This person also explained that every year, a high percentage of reviewers are new and have little or no experience in evaluating MSCA proposals.

No, host told me that was pointless. By that time we were so disappointed that we didn't want to spend more time dealing with them...

[IF ST LIF]

A drop of 20.2 points is super hurting... did you try to complain to the NCP or somewhere else for your 2018 application?

Wish you will get it this year!

Yeah, it's enough proof to believe that is a complete lottery. Indeed, the external auditor told us that we should've gone for a REDRESS process as it clearly demonstrated that there is no consistency in the review process. This person also explained that every year, a high percentage of reviewers are new and have little or no experience in evaluating MSCA proposals.

It is a drop of 16.6 not 20.2 (if below 70 this time it could potentially be 20.7+) . As mentioned earlier I Strongly believe that resubmission Leads to heavy bias by reviewer as they directly see the application was rejected the last time (but not by how much) so they 100% tend to grade lower.

If I'm correct, they only have the qualification from previous application at the very end. Once the last one has been scored.

[Krishchem]

A drop of 20.2 points is super hurting... did you try to complain to the NCP or somewhere else for your 2018 application?

Wish you will get it this year!

Yeah, it's enough proof to believe that is a complete lottery. Indeed, the external auditor told us that we should've gone for a REDRESS process as it clearly demonstrated that there is no consistency in the review process. This person also explained that every year, a high percentage of reviewers are new and have little or no experience in evaluating MSCA proposals.

It is a drop of 16.6 not 20.2 (if below 70 this time it could potentially be 20.7+) . As mentioned earlier I Strongly believe that resubmission Leads to heavy bias by reviewer as they directly see the application was rejected the last time (but not by how much) so they 100% tend to grade lower.

In that case, re-submission becomes pointless. I don't agree. Its all depends on the reviewers. Fortunately or unfortunately, luck is a crucial factor here.

[AdinaBabesh]

Here are some video briefings for MSCA -IF evaluators and evaluation process https://ec.europa.eu/info/h2020-msca-if-2018_fr It is interesting to watch.

A drop of 20.2 points is super hurting... did you try to complain to the NCP or somewhere else for your 2018 application?

Wish you will get it this year!

It is a drop of 16.6 not 20.2 (if below 70 this time it could potentially be 20.7+) . As mentioned earlier I Strongly believe that resubmission Leads to heavy bias by reviewer as they directly see the application was rejected the last time (but not by how much) so they 100% tend to grade lower.

In that case, re-submission becomes pointless. I don't agree. Its all depends on the reviewers. Fortunately or unfortunately, luck is a crucial factor here.

[Kenniz]

A drop of 20.2 points is super hurting... did you try to complain to the NCP or somewhere else for your 2018 application?

Wish you will get it this year!

It is a drop of 16.6 not 20.2 (if below 70 this time it could potentially be 20.7+) . As mentioned earlier I Strongly believe that resubmission Leads to heavy bias by reviewer as they directly see the application was rejected the last time (but not by how much) so they 100% tend to grade lower.

If I'm correct, they only have the qualification from previous application at the very end. Once the last one has been scored.

You have to fill a box in your application that asks you if it is a resubmission. This checkbox is in the sealed pdf that is generated during the submission process, the one you can download. The reviewers get this pdf, so they 100% know it is a resubmission. This is obviously intended by msca and favors new submissions. Why else would they include this question ?

[IF ST LIF]

It is a drop of 16.6 not 20.2 (if below 70 this time it could potentially be 20.7+) . As mentioned earlier I Strongly believe that resubmission Leads to heavy bias by reviewer as they directly see the application was rejected the last time (but not by how much) so they 100% tend to grade lower.

If I'm correct, they only have the qualification from previous application at the very end. Once the last one has been scored.

You have to fill a box in your application that asks you if it is a resubmission. This checkbox is in the sealed pdf that is generated during the submission process, the one you can download. The reviewers get this pdf, so they 100% know it is a resubmission. This is obviously intended by msca and favors new submissions. Why else would they include this question ?

I know, but they have access to previous scores once they have scored the current application. Apparently this is to keep consistency in the review process between years. Clearly not working

[Kenniz]

If I'm correct, they only have the qualification from previous application at the very end. Once the last one has been scored.

You have to fill a box in your application that asks you if it is a resubmission. This checkbox is in the sealed pdf that is generated during the submission process, the one you can download. The reviewers get this pdf, so they 100% know it is a resubmission. This is obviously intended by msca and favors new submissions. Why else would they include this question ?

I know, but they have access to previous scores once they have scored the current application. Apparently this is to see consistency in the review process between years. Clearly not working

so it doesnt matter for the scoring itself right?
i mean every fellowship application i did and know has this clause that new applications are favored and resubmissions are not. to be honest, this makes sense to me, even if it might seem unfair. msca doesnt even state this, but i am convinced that (even if they are told to not take this into account, which i doubt they are) most reviewers will be biased and tend to grade resubmissions lower in comparison to new ones.

[LIF]

You have to fill a box in your application that asks you if it is a resubmission. This checkbox is in the sealed pdf that is generated during the submission process, the one you can download. The reviewers get this pdf, so they 100% know it is a resubmission. This is obviously intended by msca and favors new submissions. Why else would they include this question ?

I know, but they have access to previous scores once they have scored the current application. Apparently this is to see consistency in the review process between years. Clearly not working

so it doesnt matter for the scoring itself right?
i mean every fellowship application i did and know has this clause that new applications are favored and resubmissions are not. to be honest, this makes sense to me, even if it might seem unfair. msca doesnt even state this, but i am convinced that (even if they are told to not take this into account, which i doubt they are) most reviewers will be biased and tend to grade resubmissions lower in comparison to new ones.

A while ago, I found some MSCA IF statistics (official document) and there they stated that resubmissions have a higher success rate on average than first submissions.

[hopefulacademic]

A while ago, I found some MSCA IF statistics (official document) and there they stated that resubmissions have a higher success rate on average than first submissions.

Heard this as well from a reviewer.

Regarding inexperience of reviewers: anyone can become a reviewer. So many do it, without adequate experience and with little guidance (honesty, I don't think many reviewers will have watched guidance videos for the pay they get to do the reviews).