Does the inclusion of non-academic reviewers make any difference for grant impact panels?

Abstract Broader impact of scientific research beyond academia has become increasingly important in evaluation. To evaluate broader proposals, some funding agencies compose mixed panels that include peer experts and non-academic stakeholders. Whether how reviewers bring any difference to panel discussions been understudied. We analysed 164 review reports (2014–6) from the Investigators Programme (funding Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics fields) at Science Foundation Ireland, where two types panels, with without non-academics, were composed for assessments. find reviews longer touched upon more concrete topics. Also, commented on causality attribution towards characteristics applicants process than excellence. A survey same reviewer pool supplements our understanding pros cons inclusion reviewers. discuss policy recommendations organise panels.