SARMAC Collaborative Grants - Call for Proposals
(Deadline Fri 31st Oct 2025, 23:59 anywhere on Earth)
The SARMAC Committee on Diversity and Inclusion is pleased to open a call for proposals for the 2025 SARMAC Collaborative Grants.
SARMAC is committed to fostering the principles of equity, diversity, and inclusion within our community. We are also dedicated to removing barriers that have been historically encountered and that are currently experienced by some members of our society. We are therefore excited to announce that we will be offering three grants designed to promote international collaborations within the SARMAC community and to support the work of researchers from underrepresented backgrounds and geographic locations, as well as the work of researchers who can evidence their contributions to diversity and inclusion initiatives.
The awards will fund up to $2000 USD in research expenses to support a new collaboration between researchers from different countries and institutions. The grants can be used to fund costs associated with a joint research project (e.g., participant payments, equipment, travel for the purposes of collecting data). The grants can also be used as seed funding to enable pilot data collection or preliminary work to support a larger grant application.
Eligibility criteria specify conditions that must be met for the application to be considered for funding. Any application that fails to meet the following criteria will be excluded from funding consideration:
All applicants must be members of SARMAC. We will ask you to submit your application along with emails registered with SARMAC membership of all applicants (make sure that your memberships are active).
The proposal must feature a newly established international collaboration between at least two of the lead applicants. We will ask you to provide a statement clarifying how the proposed work will lead to a new collaboration (e.g., state who of the applicants have not collaborated on a research project before and who have collaborated before) and international (i.e., state the countries where all collaborators are based).
The proposal must provide evidence of diversity in at least one of the following ways: (1) at least one of the collaborating researchers comes from an underrepresented group, (2) at least one of the collaborating researchers provides evidence of a contribution to diversity and inclusion in their academic or professional work, (3) the proposed work contributes to increasing diversity in research (e.g., via participant samples or research questions).
One researcher can be named as a lead collaborator on multiple applications but can only receive funding for one.
SARMAC Board members cannot apply for this grant.
The format of the application must comply with the criteria specified below.
To apply: (1) complete this form and (2) send your proposal to codi@sarmac.org. The form contains the following sections:
· Applicant Details: names, affiliations, and emails of all applicants.
· Eligibility Checks: provide information, statements, or confirm eligibility as per criteria stated above.
· Suggested Reviewers: if you can, provide names of at least two reviewers who could evaluate your proposal.
Your Proposal should meet the following requirements and contain the following sections:
Format requirements: pdf format, length of proposal maximum 2 pages excluding references, text single spaced, font Arial size 11, 2 cm margins. Please use our template if you can.
Title: provide a title of your proposed research.
Aims and Significance: describe the aims and significance of proposed research project, including a statement of hypotheses/planned explorations.
Methods and Analyses: outline a plan of method and analyses. We encourage applicants to engage in Open Science practices, including study preregistration and a plan for sharing data and materials. In this section, applicants should specify the roles of each collaborator.
Statement of Diversity and Inclusion: explain how the project will help foster diversity and inclusion within SARMAC (see our statement here).
Statement of Feasibility: outline the budget, estimated timeline, and feasibility of the proposed work.
In the processing of applications, we will first confirm eligibility. Next, we will score each application:
Each proposal will be scored by two independent reviewers.
Reviewers will be members of CoDI, volunteers from the Board, and external experts.
If discrepancy between scores of two reviewers exceeds 4 points (25% of the total of 16 points), a third reviewer will be requested.
Scoring Rubric is provided below.
|
Criterion |
1 (Unsatisfactory) |
2 (Satisfactory) |
3 (Good) |
4 (Excellent) |
|
Research Aims and Significance |
Project aims and/or significance are not well justified. The proposed research lacks evidence and/or no clear research question is described. |
Project aims and significance are justified but there is lack of clarity or substantial ambiguity. A research question is outlined, but some aspects are lacking evidence or not well explained. |
Project aims and significance are justified but there is space for minor improvement of clarity or ambiguity. Proposed research addresses a question that is backed up by some evidence, but the justification could be stronger. |
Project aims and significance are clearly justified with no ambiguities. The proposed research has strong evidence base and addresses a clear and well-justified question. |
|
Methods and Analyses How rigorous, appropriate, and well-explained are the methods and analyses? |
The plan of methods and/or analyses is not clearly described or is inappropriate for the proposed project. |
The plan of methods and analyses lacks clarity or contain some vague or poorly explained elements. The proposed methods may pose challenges for meeting the research aims. |
The plan of methods and analyses is well described but there is space for minor improvement of clarity or ambiguity. The methods and analyses are likely appropriate for meeting the research aims. |
The plan of methods and analyses is rigorous, clearly explained, and appropriate for meeting the research aims. |
|
Diversity and Inclusion To what extent would funding the proposal help promote diversity and inclusion in line with the aims of SARMAC’s Committee on Diversity and Inclusion? This item can be evidenced in three different ways (evidence for one or more can be provided): (1) at least one of the collaborating researchers comes from an underrepresented group, (2) at least one of the collaborating researchers provides evidence of a contribution to diversity and inclusion in their academic or professional work (proportional to career stage), (3) the proposed work contributes to increasing diversity in research (e.g., via participant samples or research questions). |
Evidence for the contribution towards diversity and inclusion is limited. |
Some evidence for the contribution towards diversity and inclusion is provided. Funding the proposal would probably contribute to diversity and inclusion to a minor degree or the contribution is unclear. |
Evidence for the contribution towards diversity and inclusion is provided. Funding the proposal would likely provide a moderate contribution towards diversity and inclusion. |
Clear evidence for the contribution towards diversity and inclusion is provided. It is clear from the proposal how funding the work would provide a strong contribution towards diversity and inclusion. |
|
Statement of Feasibility Is the budget reasonable and justified? To what extent is the project plan feasible given the proposed budget and timeline? |
The project plan does not seem feasible given the budget and proposed timeline and/or the budget is not reasonable given the proposed research. |
The project feasibility, budget, and timeline are described but there are concerns over feasibility in terms of completing the project in a timely manner with the proposed budget. |
The project feasibility, budget, and timeline are described and there are only minor concerns over feasibility in terms of completing the project in a timely manner with the proposed budget. |
The project feasibility, budget, and timeline are clearly described and there are no or only negligible concerns over feasibility in terms of completing the project in a timely manner with the proposed budget. |
We will calculate final ranks in the following way:
Each evaluation criterion will contribute equal weight to the final score.
For each application, we will calculate a simple rank based on the sum of scores across the four scoring criteria and across all reviewers divided by the maximum score of 16*the number of reviewers. For example, if an application receives the following scores: Reviewer 1: 3, 2, 3, 4; Reviewer 2: 2, 2, 3, 3; the sum of scores is 12+10, divided by 16*2, resulting in rank score of 0.6875.
Ties will be resolved by examining the Feasibility score, if necessary, followed by the Diversity score, followed by the Aims and Significance score, and finally by the Methods and Analyses score.
Finally, we will check funding eligibility for cases where the same applicant is named on multiple applications: only one application can be funded, the one with the highest score. All applications suggested for funding are then approved by the Board.
Applications are due Friday October 31st 2025 by the end of the day (11.59pm) anywhere on earth – applicants must complete the form and send their proposals to codi@sarmac.org by the deadline.
If you have any questions, please contact the SARMAC Committee on Diversity and Inclusion at codi@sarmac.org.
Collaborative Grant - 2023-25 Recipients
Congratulations to the three recipient teams of the 2023-2025 SARMAC Collaborative Grants. The following projects were selected based on strong theory, methods, and significance, and a clear statement of how the project will help foster diversity and inclusion within SARMAC and/or support international collaboration. We look forward to hearing more about the outcomes of these projects.
SteVens et al. - Cross-cultural differences in metacognition and memory
Umanath et al. - Functions of National Collective Memories in Nations in that Differ in the Consensus of Their National Identity
Luther et al. - Trauma and Testimony: Examining How Victim Demeanor Shapes Credibility Judgments in Sexual Assault Investigations
-
Title: Cross-cultural differences in metacognition and memory
Team:
Laura Stevens, University of Birmingham, United Kingdom
Rumandeep Hayre, University of Birmingham, United Kingdom
Jang-Han Lee, Chung-Ang University, South Korea
Sangyeon Yoon, Korean National Police University, South Korea
Project Summary:
To evaluate when we have remembered something correctly or not is a complex and vital skill. Metacognition is a higher-order skill which enables us to monitor and control our behaviour. For instance, if we have low confidence in our memory recall, we may choose to withhold our response to a question. By harnessing this information, this could contribute towards the assessment and validity of eyewitness testimony. However, the cross-cultural differences in metacognition and eyewitness memory are scarcely understood.
Researchers from the UK and South Korea, who are part of the UK-KO Eyewitness Memory Network, were awarded the SARMAC CoDI Grant to investigate cross-cultural differences in metacognition and eyewitness memory. This important research will diversify our knowledge towards eyewitness memory assessment procedures.
-
Title: Functions of National Collective Memories in Nations in that Differ in the Consensus of Their National Identity
Team:
Sharda Umanath, Claremont McKenna College, United States
Yui Fukushima, Waseda University, Japan
Maryanne Garry, University of Waikato, New Zealand
Project Summary:
To historians and sociologists, collective memories serve crucial functions in shaping national identities (Anderson, 1991). But cognitive psychologists know relatively little about the functions of collective memory. We do have some evidence that collective memories serve an “identity” function. Among Americans, collective memories—much like their autobiographical counterparts—serve identity functions, but also social and directive functions (Burnell, Umanath, & Garry, 2023). However, there are reasons to expect the pattern of national collective memories in the US is not particularly representative of national collective memories in other countries more generally. We propose work that will connect to our prior work, as well as to broader literature in history and sociology (see also Assmann & Czaplicka, 1995; Hirst et al., 2018; Wertsch & Roediger, 2008). Our aim is to determine the extent to which national collective memories serve identity, social, and directive functions in nations that differ in the consensus of their national identities. We will accomplish this goal by focusing on the US and Japan. The first step in our proposed project is to establish the nationally important collective memories for Japan. Then, using the most frequently nominated events, we will follow the methodology of Burnell et al. (2023, Experiment 2) to examine the degree to which Japanese participants believe that these nationally important events serve identity, social, and directive functions as captured by the Collective TALE.
-
Title: Trauma and Testimony: Examining How Victim Demeanor Shapes Credibility Judgments in Sexual Assault Investigations
Team:
Kirk Luther, Carleton University, Canada
Deidre Brown, University of Otago, New Zealand
Heather L. Price, Thompson Rivers University, Canada
Project Summary:
The effectiveness of sexual assault investigations often hinges on the nuanced understanding of trauma’s complex and diverse effects on victim behavior. Traditional investigative practices frequently place undue emphasis on the victim’s credibility, which is largely judged through their behaviour in investigative interviews and their ability to recount the incident in detail. Our discussions with investigators across Canada, the USA, New Zealand, and the UK further highlight the challenges inherent in eliciting testimony from trauma victims. These insights underscore an urgent requirement for the development and implementation of trauma-informed interviewing guidelines.
Our proposed research aims to investigate how victim demeanor and behavior during interviews affect their perceived credibility. We will recruit participants through Prolific Academic to complete a Qualtrics survey. Participants will be randomly assigned to observe one of three simulated victim interviews, each characterized by differing victim behaviors: Atypical Behaviours (e.g., victim laughs throughout the interview), Neutral Behaviours (e.g., no distinct outward behavioural signs), and Typical Behaviours (e.g., victim cries during the interview). Credibility of each victim will be measured using the Witness Credibility Scale. We hypothesize that victims displaying typical trauma-associated behaviors will be perceived as more credible than those displaying atypical and neutral behaviours.
With our research, we aim to advance practical understanding of the impact of victim behaviour on credibility assessments, paving the way for significant reforms in the justice system’s treatment of sexual assault cases.
-
THIS CALL IS NOW CLOSED - THIS CALL IS NOW CLOSED - THIS CALL IS NOW CLOSED
The SARMAC Committee on Diversity and Inclusion is pleased to open a call for proposals for the inaugural SARMAC Collaborative Grants.
SARMAC is committed to fostering the principles of equity, diversity, and inclusion within our community. We are also dedicated to removing barriers that have been historically encountered and that are currently experienced by some members of our society. We are therefore excited to announce that we will be offering a number of grants designed to promote international collaborations within the SARMAC community and to support the work of researchers from underrepresented backgrounds and geographic locations.
The awards will fund up to $2000 USD in research expenses to support a new collaboration between two researchers from different institutions. We welcome and encourage applications from Indigenous peoples, racialised persons, visible minorities, women, persons with disabilities, sexual and gender minorities, researchers from countries in which SARMAC is underrepresented, and members of all underrepresented groups who lack funding opportunities to support their research.
The grants can be used to fund costs associated with a joint research project (e.g., participant payments, equipment, travel for the purposes of collecting data). The grants can also be used as seed funding to enable pilot data collection or preliminary work to support a larger grant application.
To apply, you will need to submit a short proposal (1-3 pages) including:
A description of the proposed research project (background, methods, expected results, & significance)
A proposed budget
A rough project timeline
A statement explaining how the project will help foster diversity and inclusion within SARMAC and/or support international collaboration.
Applications are due December 1st, 2023 by the end of the day (11.59pm) anywhere on earth.To apply, complete the application form HERE. This call is now CLOSED.
Questions: Contact the SARMAC Committee on Diversity and Inclusion (codi@sarmac.org).