"Grants" and their impact on behaviors

There was a time when I thought I could turn my blog-writing-skills toward "writing grant applications". My thinking was that with inflation biting at my heals I might need additional income and "Writing grants" seemed like a natural evolution.

I recently had a very small taste of that activity and decided that my time will be better spent pulling weeds in the garden.

This is my current mental picture of "grants".

Arbitrary and capricious rewards/punishments

B. F. Skinner's lab did a landmark experiment with pigeons where they randomly rewarded the birds food. That is, they made food available to hungry pigeons for a short duration at random time intervals.

I think the original motivation was to determine if random rewards might be more suitable "control" while running experiments on behavioral-conditioning than feeding the birds short rations at regular intervals.

In the words of the published paper:

A pigeon is brought to a stable state of hunger by reducing it to 75 percent of its weight when well fed. It is put into an experimental cage for a few minutes each day. A food hopper attached to the cage may be swung into place so that the pigeon can eat from it. A solenoid and a timing relay hold the hopper in place for five sec. at each reinforcement.

If a clock is now arranged to present the food hopper at regular intervals with no reference whatsoever to the bird's behavior, operant conditioning usually takes place. In six out of eight cases the resulting responses were so clearly defined that two observers could agree perfectly in counting instances. One bird was conditioned to turn counter-clockwise about the cage, making two or three turns between reinforcements. Another repeatedly thrust its head into one of the upper corners of the cage. A third developed a 'tossing' response, as if placing its head beneath an invisible bar and lifting it repeatedly. Two birds developed a pendulum motion of the head and body, in
which the head was extended forward and swung from right to left with a sharp movement followed by a somewhat slower return. The body generally followed the movement and a few steps might be taken when it was extensive. Another bird was conditioned to make incomplete pecking or brushing movements directed toward but not touching the floor...

***

The experiment might be said to demonstrate a sort of superstition. The bird behaves as if there was a causal relation between its behavior and the presentation of food, although such a relation is lacking. There are many  analogies in human behavior. Rituals for changing one's luck at cards are  good examples. A few accidental connections between a ritual and favorable consequences suffice to set up and maintain the behavior in spite of many unreinforced instances. The bowler who has released a ball down the alley but continues to behave as if he were controlling it by twisting and turning his arm and shoulder is another case in point. These behaviors have,
of course, no real effect upon one's luck or upon a ball half way down an alley, just as in the present case the food would appear as often if the pigeon did nothing—or, more strictly speaking, did something else. 

A camel is a racehorse that was designed by a committee

Applications for grants are processed by committees. Sabrina, Tabitha, Heidi and Keith sit around a table and make decisions. First Sabrina gets to pick one and they vote. Then Tabitha picks one. Then Heidi and then Keith. A causal kind of collusion evolves where "If you vote for my choice, I will vote for yours." 

Each member of the committee has "special interests" that they refuse to compromise over. Often it is making sure that "their people" get a major piece of the action.

Each member is trying to impress their boss with the zeal with which they protect their silo's special interests.

Each member is also trying to read the weather with respect to future fads by which their decisions will be judged.

Finally, grant application directions are padded with fuzzy-feel-good boiler-plate* (Note, this language cut-and-pasted from an actual grant application):

• "Build local community capacity to grow, manage and care..."
• "Assist communities in developing and implementing sustainable community..."
• "Address environmental justice and equity issues by engaging and involving disadvantaged and/or underserved communities as defined by federal executive order 14008 (Justice40 initiative)"
• "Improve public awareness and understanding of the benefits of preserving, maintaining and expanding..."
• "Facilitate partnerships among residents and public, private, and nonprofit organizations to encourage stewardship..."
• "Support innovative projects and partnerships..."
• "Enhance the technical skills of those involved in planning, managing, or maintaining ..."
• "Incorporate       fill-in-blank       into climate adaptation and resilience strategies to support more equitable and resilient communities."

These are all bumpers in the pin-ball machine that spits out grants and those factors create "randomness". Applicants who did not receive a grant invariably study the applications of those who did receive grants and make adjustments in next year's application.

Why this might be important to know

If the Harris machine somehow wins the election, .gov will dominate the economy into the foreseeable future.

They will pump money into the economy and "create" jobs via grants.

As bad as it is now, the chaos and irrational behaviors (like criminalizing the use of petroleum products) of individuals and organizations will get even worse.

Decisions will be based on "superstitions" (in the Skinner sense) rather than on well-defined objectives and rational thought.

*Unmeasurable!