# Pilot: Identifying key research

([_Note for the Management Team_](#user-content-fn-1)[^1]_)_

## Test-case research for proof of concept

**Identify a small set of papers or projects as representative first-cases; use to help test the system we are building in a concrete manner.**

{% hint style="info" %}
_In doing the above, we are also collecting a longer list of key papers, projects, authors, topics, issues, etc._
{% endhint %}

## Steps taken

1. **Post on EA Forum** (and other places) and present[ form](https://airtable.com/shrdHHI0zK7rkJCP3) (see view at bottom of this section) promoting our call for papers further, with bounty.

{% embed url="https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/kftzYdmZf4nj2ExN7/the-most-pivotal-empirical-pieces-of-research-you-would-like-2" %}

[_**Rules for bounty HERE**_](https://docs.google.com/document/d/17Z4ENov9BYvbvrtFju1X5d8-mD0vCdyagSPd9ArSC2Y/edit)

2\. **Search for most-cited papers** (within our domain) among EA-aligned researchers and organizations.

3\. **Dig into existing lists, reviews, and syllabi, such as:**

* GPI [research agenda](https://globalprioritiesinstitute.org/research-agenda-web-version/#22_Epistemological_issues) (includes many posed questions)
* Open Philanthropy[ "questions that might affect our grantmaking"](https://www.openphilanthropy.org/blog/technical-and-philosophical-questions-might-affect-our-grantmaking) (needs updating? few academic links)
* [The EA Behavioral Science Newsletter](https://preview.mailerlite.com/m9i6r0j7h9)
* Syllabi: [Pablo's lis](http://www.stafforini.com/blog/effective-altruism-syllabi/)t; [Economics focus](https://effective-giving-marketing.gitbook.io/economics-for-ea-and-vice-versa/existing-resources-programs-examples) list; David Rhys-Bernard's syllabus ([link to my commented/highlighted version)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LeHrhhAcSWGQze6nSeaA9eNIXoG2vqPKM6-PrHognR0/edit)

<details>

<summary>Consider: <strong>"Mistakes" pages?</strong></summary>

* [Givewell](https://www.givewell.org/about/our-mistakes) (mainly _operational mistakes)_

- [ACX/Scott Alexander](https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/mistakes?s=r)

Not very relevant because focused on operational issues

</details>

**5. Appeal directly to authors and research groups**

{% embed url="https://airtable.com/shrdHHI0zK7rkJCP3" %}

6\. **Cross-promote** with [call-for-participants-research](../../readme-1/call-for-participants-research "mention")

## Pivot: direct focus on NBER working papers

[direct-evaluation-track](../../policies-projects-evaluation-workflow/considering-projects/direct-evaluation-track "mention")

1. _Pete Slattery:_ "Do a complete test run using a single paper and team…" Thus, we aim to identify a small set of papers (or projects), maybe 2–3, that seem like good test and example cases, and offer a bounty for projects we choose as test cases.
2. Note that much of the work identified here has already been peer-reviewed and "published." While we envision that _The Unjournal_ may assess papers that are _already published in traditional journals_, these are probably not the best case for the PoC. Thus, we de-prioritize these for now.

[^1]: See also

    * list of papers under consideration in private Airtable base `EA_unjournal_resources`, `crucial_research` table,
    * Linked discussion in [this Gdoc](https://docs.google.com/document/d/14HXHQTqwJ5VOw-SBoJD8Sd3jathdO9geKdmhdOOx_Gw/edit#heading=h.b6n4xb3q8q3c)
    * and [this slack channel](https://docs.google.com/document/d/14HXHQTqwJ5VOw-SBoJD8Sd3jathdO9geKdmhdOOx_Gw/edit)
