President Michel Cosnard

Thomas Oertner

This report is the sole result of the unit's evaluation by the expert committee, the composition of which is specified below. The assessments contained herein are the expression of an independent and collegial reviewing by the committee.

UNIT PRESENTATION

INTRODUCTION HISTORY AND GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION OF THE UNIT

The unit is a merger of three CNRS laboratories (Llano, Meunier and Emiliani) under the name Saints-Pères Paris Institute for Neuroscience (SPPIN). All teams are located at the St-Pères University Center.

MANAGEMENT TEAM

During the least report period, Ms Isabel Llano, Mr Claude Meunier and Ms Valentina Emiliani served as unit leaders of the three laboratories. The new unit will be directed by Mr Martin Oheim.

HCERES NOMENCLATURE SVE4_1 Neurologie

SCIENTIFIC DOMAIN

The unit conducts research in fundamental neuroscience, focussed on motor systems, neuro-glia interactions and synaptic transmission, enabled by interdisciplinary technology development in imaging, electrophysiology, and molecular tools. The restructured unit combines electrophysiology, molecular biology and imaging approaches to address fundamental questions in neuroscience, ranging from the biophysics of single synapses to the control of animal behaviour. A special focus is the function of the motor system in health and disease (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Huntington's disease) that is studied in animal models and in human 3D tissue culture systems.

UNIT WORKFORCE

GLOBAL ASSESSMENT OF THE INTERDISCIPLINARY UNIT

An outstanding strength is the expertise and creativity in developing novel optical imaging techniques and probes, including two-photon and super-resolution microscopy and nano-biosensors, which enables the unit to uncover subcellular details of nanodomain signalling and contributes to the high international visibility of its research. Excellent collaborations with industry ensure commercial development of new inventions.

Compared to the topics of the predecessor unit, there is a new focus on intracellular signalling processes and glia cell biology, which are topics of obvious relevance for a number of neurodegenerative diseases. This direction with greatly benefit from the newly developed microscopes and probes and will also increase the medical and societal relevance of the unit's research program. If the unit succeeds in attracting new teams with expertise in systems neuroscience and behaviour, and/or computational modelling, it would complete the unit's portfolio of techniques for state-of-the-art integrative brain research.

The production, visibility and impact of the teams in the last evaluation period have been excellent to outstanding as detailed below. A challenge for the unit is the distribution of individual teams on different floors of a large building. There is a lack of common social rooms to foster unit cohesion and informal discussions. To counter this challenge, the teams have implemented frequent meetings and committees to encourage internal collaborations. Several renovation projects have improved the quality of the infrastructure, although some facilities appear to be understaffed and further loss of technical staff, e.g. due to retirement, needs to be prevented. In response to the recommendation to develop an integrated PhD program in neuroscience, the unit leader has initiated negotiations about a transnational (Franco-German) PhD program.

The evaluation reports of Hceres are available online: www.hceres.com

Evaluation of clusters of higher education and research institutions Evaluation of higher education and research institutions Evaluation of research Evaluation of doctoral schools Evaluation of programmes International evaluation and accreditation

HCERES scientific officer: Ms Catherine HEURTEAUX Representatives of supervising institutions and bodies:

	Unit name:	Saint-Pères Paris Institute for Neurosciences
	Unit acronym:	SPPIN
	Requested label:	UMR CNRS & Université Paris Descartes
	Application type:	Restructuration
	Current number:
	Head of the unit (2014-2018):	Ms Isabel LLANO, Mr Claude MEUNIER and Ms Valentina EMILIANI
	Project leader (2019-2023):	Mr Martin OHEIM
	Number of teams:	4 + 2 recruited
	COMMITTEE MEMBERS
	Chair:	Mr Thomas OERTNER, Hamburg University, Germany
	Experts:	Ms Anne CANTEREAU BECQ, Université de Poitiers (supporting personnel)
		Mr Laurent FAGNI, Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle de Montpellier
		Mr Stefan HALLERMANN, University Leipzig, Germany
		Mr Thomas MISGELD, Technische Universität München, Germany
		Mr David PERRAIS, Université de Bordeaux (representative of CoNRS)
		Ms Catherine LABBE-JULLIE, Université Paris Descartes
		Ms Clarisse LEFORT-DAVID, CNRS
		Mr Stefano MARULLO, Université Paris Descartes
		Mr Bernard POULAIN, CNRS

Unit workforce Number 30/06/2017 Number 01/01/2019 Permanent staff

	Non-permanent professors and associate professors, including emeritus	2
	Non-permanent full time scientists, including emeritus, post-docs	7
	Non-permanent supporting personnel	6
	PhD Students	9
	TOTAL non-permanent staff	24
	TOTAL unit	58
	Full professors and similar positions	2	2
	Assistant professors and similar positions	4	5
	Full time research directors (Directeurs de recherche) and similar positions	7	5
	Full time research associates (Chargés de recherche) and similar positions	10	8
	Other scientists ("Conservateurs, cadres scientifiques des EPIC, fondations, industries, etc.")	0	0
	High school teachers	0	0
	Supporting personnel (ITAs, BIATSSs and others, notably of EPICs)	11	13
	TOTAL permanent staff	34	33
	Non-permanent staff


Meunier

Grading

Once the visits for the 2012-2013 evaluation campaign had been completed, the chairpersons of the expert committees, who met per disciplinary group, proceeded to attribute a score to the research units in their group (and, when necessary, for these units' in-house teams). This score (A+, A, B, C) concerned each of the six criteria defined by the AERES. NN (not-scored) attached to a criteria indicate that this one was not applicable to the particular case of this research unit or this team. Criterion 1 -C1 : Scientific outputs and quality ; Criterion 2 -C2 : Academic reputation and appeal ; Criterion 3 -C3 : Interactions with the social, economic and cultural environment ; Criterion 4 -C4 : Organisation and life of the institution (or of the team) ; Criterion 5 -C5 : Involvement in training through research ; Criterion 6 -C6 : Strategy and five-year plan.

With respect to this score, the research unit concerned by this report and, its in-house teams

 Introduction History and geographical location of the unit

The laboratory entitled Center for Neurophysics, Physiology, Pathology emerges from the fusion of four teams previously hosted by two different laboratories i.e. the "Laboratoire de Neurophysique et Physiologie" and the "Centre d'études sensorimotricité". It is located in the Saint-Pères research and teaching building. Altogether, the four teams gather 21 researchers (13 full-time and 6 with teaching duty) and 4 ITA/IATOS. As such, the laboratory is one, even if not the only one, example of a genuine center of interdisciplinary research, since it gathers in equal number theoreticians and experimentalists from both the Institut des Sciences Biologiques (INSB) and the Institut de Physique (INP) of the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), but there will be a majority of experimentalists in the new laboratory. Another feature of the Center for Neurophysics, Physiology, Pathology is the wide palette of experimental techniques since true technical and experimental expertise ranges from molecular analysis on animal models to human behavioural analysis going through in vivo and in vitro electrophysiology, and indeed theoretical approaches.

The laboratory is part of the Institute of Neurosciences and Cognition that gathers various laboratories from the University Paris Descartes, encompassing a large community of researchers in the various domains of Brain Sciences.

Management team:

Mr Claude MEUNIER, DR at CNRS, will head the new research unit.

AERES nomenclature:

SVE1_LS5 Neurobiology Unit workforce: The most important strength of the laboratory is the overall high level of publications across the teams together with very good international visibility. There is no significant weaknesses in any team. Real translational approaches have been developed in the lab.

One peculiarity and strength is the complete integration of theoreticians and experimentalists that conceive and conduct research at the same place. As a rare example, the spectrum from molecular biology to the most integrated and theoretical aspects are covered within the laboratory. This is a key reason for the attractiveness of the laboratory.

Weaknesses and threats:

Two weaknesses have been raised. First of all, the very low institutional technical support. Due to the very wide span of technical expertise, development of the laboratory will be impeded by the lack of adequate support. Secondly, the present lack of clarity about the governance of the new unit should be also addressed as a priority

Recommendations:

Improving the ratio of technical support should be a priority.

In light of the restructuring and growth of the unit, the new challenge will be to set a well defined governance structure that will gather a general consensus.

 Detailed assessments

Assessment of scientific quality and outputs

A detailed analysis of scientific quality and output is analytically performed in each team report. Overall, the scientific quality in terms of academic publications is excellent since, among much more, they published 23 papers in the leading Journal of Neuroscience, 1 Science, 2 Physical Letters. The total number of international peer-review publications is > 130. Laboratory members organized several international meetings and schools or workshops.

Assessment of the unit's academic reputation and appeal

The laboratory is very attractive since 6 young researchers have been recruited in the last years on permanent positions. Post-docs, and more surprisingly students, are joining the laboratory from various countries (Argentina, Japan, USA, Europe…). Although challenging, significant funds have been successfully obtained and several international conferences/ workshops and international meeting have been organized by laboratory members.

Assessment of the unit's interaction with the social, economic and cultural environment One member of the laboratory has clinical responsibilities (in team 3) and the laboratory configuration will promote other teams to be involved in translational projects. Members are also involved in general public dissemination.

Assessment of the unit's organisation and life

Several aspects of the organization still need to be set up. The committee clearly understood that priority had been given to scientific organization since the centre is a new amalgamation that brings together investigators with different scientific and laboratory cultures. While the committee has been impressed by the high level of scientific quality, it had very little, if any, information on the future laboratory governance as well as on various issues such as hygiene and security. The committee strongly encourages the director to organize, following the evaluation, general meetings in which every one can participate in defining new rules.

Assessment of the unit's involvement in training through research

Overall, training is very good to excellent, specifically attributable to the investment of one PI. The graduate students and postdoctoral fellows claim that they have a supportive and collegial environment and are fully integrated to the neuroscience community at the University Paris Descartes.

Assessment of the five-year plan and strategy

The committee has been highly convinced by the two-axes strategy that allows for a real merger between the two founder laboratories. Furthermore, it is planned to have a general scientific policy that would grant the teams through these axes.

4  Team-by-team analysis Over the past several years, this lab has engaged in high risk activities which have paid off. First, they developed the technique of in vivo dynamic clamp of spinal motoneurons in the cat, then adapted their in vivo techniques to develop an in vivo mouse preparation for recording spinal neurons, and thirdly successfully developed the mouse preparation for in vivo motor unit typing. They are the only lab in the world that is able to do this, which has provided them the opportunity to study the physiological and pathophysiological properties of type-identified motoneurons. These preparations have set the stage for future work, and will facilitate the exploration of important questions in the coming years (see below).

A young new researcher has introduced these techniques to the laboratory in the deparment of Physiology at Northwestern University in Chicago, where he did his post-doctoral fellowship. The team is strengthened by his recent recruitment back to their centre, where he will complement the other team members.

The team has published 16 papers in the last 5 years (including those by the junior investigator when at Northwestern), 8 of which are in the high-ranking Journal of Neuroscience. Three of their papers have already been cited more than 20 times each, and total citations are 102 (data from Web of Science), which considering that 10 of the publications were in 2011 or 2012 is impressive. Their conference presentations are international. One to two of these are review papers. This productivity amounts to about 1 research paper per person per year.

Assessment of the unit's academic reputation and appeal

The work done by this team has influenced the work in many labs around the world. It has also led to success in obtaining grants. Importantly, the team holds an NIH R01 award together with a laboratory at Northwestern. This would be an excellent accomplishment at any time; in the current fiscal situation in the USA with funding rates very low, this is truly outstanding. They have collaborations with Northwestern as well as with others in Rome, Paris, and Marseille. They have organized an international meeting in Paris (2010) that was very well attended.

Assessment of the unit's interaction with the social, economic and cultural environment

After taking risks to develop these preparations (see above), these successful preparations will allow them to explore the pathophysiology of a devastating disease, ALS. So although they have not yet collaborated with clinicians, their grouping with the expertise of the development and pathologies of neuromuscular junctions team -which has clinical collaborators -is promising.

Assessment of the unit's organisation and life

Nothing specific to mention for this criteria

Assessment of the unit's involvement in training through research

There are a number of undergraduate and graduate students that have been trained by this team. Evidence of their integration includes their involvement as authors on publications. In addition, some trainees have gone on to have successful academic careers.

The group leader and colleagues are involved in formal teaching. The group leader teaches at the Masters level (at Descartes and UPMC), and represents Descartes on the board of the ED3C PhD program. He is also involved in PhD and masters candidate juries. A member of team teaches at the Spring School of the ENP, and another one, although newly appointed, has also begun to teach BIP Masters.

Assessment of the five-year plan and strategy

The strategy of the team is based on the novel preparations that they have developed and the findings they have obtained from the use of these preparations. The strategy represents a logical extension from this work. They have divided the research into 3 projects: 1) to profile sub-types of motoneurons; 2) to characterize a central synapse (motoneuron to Renshaw cell), and to study motoneuron degeneration in ALS. They have the tools and expertise to carry out these experiments. That is, their investment in high risk activity in the past is now paying off and they are assured of obtaining high quality and meaningful data. This is an excellent project that will certainly impact the field of spinal physiology as well as the pathophysiology of ALS. The preparations are difficult and unique, making the program ambitious and innovative. The strategy is clearly delineated. The team will maintain its international standing through this high quality research.

The strategy of alignment with team 4 is very powerful. Specifically, as ALS affects (and may start at) the neuromuscular junction, their combined expertise could lead to further understanding of this disease. In addition, there is potential for translation with the links that team 4 has established with clinicians.

Conclusion

 Strengths and opportunities: This is a very strong group of researchers who have a track record of producing high quality results. The opportunity for collaboration with the the development and pathologies of neuromuscular junctions team and possibly in the future with clinicians is a tremendous opportunity.

 Weaknesses and threats:

Despite their success at obtaining external peer-reviewed grant funding, the team is lacking in stable technical support. Given the difficulty of their experiments, improvement in this situation would significantly benefit the team and hence the field.

The lack of space in the current animal house is preventing some series of experiments. The team has a limited number of cages that they are managing well, but the acquisition of new transgenic strains is difficult to impossible. Hopefully, the new animal facility will be ready in the not too distant future.

 Recommendations:

The team should continue their strong work, and build supports with the other teams in the lab through journal clubs and group/lab meetings. This may lead to new and interesting collaborations. The publication activity is excellent as quantified by 32 publications published during 2007-2012, of which 24 publications appeared when the members were actually working in the unit. The remaining publications appeared prior to the members' arrival in the unit. It is notable that a large percentage of the publications appeared in highranking journals such as Journal of Neuroscience ( 7), Physical Review Letters (2) and Science (1). Especially theoretical papers are notoriously difficult to publish in high-ranking general neuroscience journals; hence the accomplishments of the team are laudable. Statistically the scientific output quantifies to 0.98 articles per year per researcher (counting 6.5 full-time researchers), which in itself is not necessarily high. However, the committee of experts appreciated the scientific strategy of the team to strive for quality rather than quantity.

Assessment of the unit's academic reputation and appeal

The team is internationally well recognized as one of the leading groups in theoretical neuroscience in Europe. Various indicators support the superb academic reputation of the team and are discussed in the following.

Team members are regularly invited to national and international conferences, as well as workshops and graduate schools, and assistance in international peer evaluation committees. They have organized various international conferences and workshops. The team takes a leadership role in the France-Israel LEA for Neuroscience, which further enhances the international attractiveness of the team due to frequent academic exchanges outside the laboratory. Quite a substantial number of national and international collaborations is in place and has proven functional documented by mutual publications. The team has clearly demonstrated to be able to attract funding from national and international sources, which helps them to finance their research and international activities. Further, a significant percentage of students and postdocs is international, further underwriting the team's international reputation.

Assessment of the unit's interaction with the social, economic and cultural environment Outside of the academic context, no main interactions have been noted except of the affiliation of a member as vice president of CAPET Biotechnologies.

Assessment of the unit's organisation and life

Nothing specific to mention for this criteria

Assessment of the unit's involvement in training through research

Several of the team members are regularly invited to teach at pedagogical sessions of international workshops and graduate schools.

Assessment of the five-year plan and strategy

The novel composition of the team of theoreticians and experimentalists promises to provide an exciting and fruitful environment. So far only little interactions of two subgroups are evidenced through mutual publications, but clear plans in terms of regular and frequent seminars and common subprojects have been put in place to nurture these interactions. Each subgroup has interesting projects that are doable given the resources. The evaluation committee appreciates the multi-tiered approach in continuing existing research lines that promise to be successful since they are based on prior results; as well as addressing novel scientific problems arising from the novel team composition. Notably, a member of the team brings a new exciting scientific field to the team and has built a new experimental set-up to perform studies on behavior and electrophysiology with birds (including brain lesions) in parallel to computational neuroscience.

Conclusion  Strengths and opportunities:

The novel team has well-developed projects that promise interesting results within a four year framework. Notable is the well-formulated scientific vision of the theoretical component. The interdisicplinary composition is a wonderful opportunity to physiologically ground the theoretical work. A potential enhanced computational support by the institution, preferably by the acquisition of a High Performance Computer (HPC) cluster and its technical support, provides an excellent opportunity to improve the already superb performance of this team.

 Weaknesses and threats:

No weakness or threat was clearly identified.

 Recommendations:

The novel configuration of the team is very exciting. The committee encourages the team to pursue its wellproven and established scientific strategy, however, prioritize the interactions between theoreticians and experimentalists within the new team whenever possible.  Detailed assessments

Assessment of scientific quality and outputs

The research developed by this new team essentially concerns the integration of multisensory cues in the control of movement and perception. The team members are experts in a wide range of vestibular system's functions, and a special interest is therefore devoted to the vestibular inputs. Another important aim consists in determining how sensorimotor processes adapt to perturbations such as change in the gravito-inertial force field, pathologies and sensory conflicts. The use of both human (healthy, idiopathic scoliosis) and animal (rodent, frog, pigeon) studies and the use of numerous different innovative and complementary approaches (e.g. body and eye movement recordings, virtual reality, tracking of intracellular calcium ions concentration, modelling, labyrinth ablation of frog Xenopus at larval stage, …) allow them to undertake a focused attack on these issues.

A strength of the members of this team concerns technical developments. They have been involved in numerous technical research innovations (e.g., system for recording movements of rodents with respect to their underlying skeletons, electro-optical technique for controlling calcium concentration in real time at submicron resolution...) and are currently working on robots movement control.

The team is very productive. Since 2007, 66 original papers have been published in peer-reviewed journals. Many of them were published in very competitive international journals (e.g., Journal of Neuroscience (N=8), Journal of Neurophysiology (N=8), Journal of Physiology Lond). The fact that the team is similarly successful to publish animal and human studies in such journals is remarkable. Several papers were also published in important clinical journals (e.g., Annals of Thoracic Surgery, Archives of Otolaryngology --Head and Neck Surgery, Clinical and Experimental Allergy). The originality and importance of the work developed by his team are attested by the high number of citations of several papers (e.g., at least 7 papers have an average citation per year greater than 4.45).

Assessment of the unit's academic reputation and appeal

The team has established a large and stable network of local, national (Lyon, Marseille, Strasbourg) and international (Germany, Italy, US, Belgium) partners. They lead collaborations financed by grants (e.g., CNRS (PEPS and Neuro IC programs), CNES, ESA and ANR that involve national and international contributors. They are referees for many of these funding agencies.

Assessment of the unit's interaction with the social, economic and cultural environment

This is another strength of the members of the team. Indeed, several researchers conducted by the team may have important impacts in clinics, space navigation, robotics, virtual reality. Numerous non-academic partners use their expertise and this takes the form of contracts between the team and these external partners (Fondation Cotrel, Pierre Fabre Médicaments, CNES, ESA). The members have a strong a sustained interest in dissemination, and have contributed to the TV program "Une Nuit dans l'Espace" (France 2, French TV).

Assessment of the unit's organisation and life

Nothing specific to mention for this criteria

Assessment of the unit's involvement in training through research

Team members have supervised the research internships of several Masters (1 and 2) students. 2008 was the last year that a student has obtained a PhD degree under the direction of a team member. Currently, the team does not have any enrolled PhD student. The HDR recently obtained by a team member will probably help to increase the involvement of the team in research training.

Fulltime researchers have contributed to teaching in local Masters programs and as lecturers in international summer schools (e.g. Champalimaud Neuroscience Program, Portugal).

Assessment of the five-year plan and strategy

The proposed project is original and important for the advance of knowledge in the field of sensorimotor integration. It is in direct continuity with the work developed in recent years by the members in their originating teams. Thanks to the integration within a single team of researchers having different strengths (electrophysiology, clinics, computation, behavior, etc.), multi-disciplinarity will be pushed further in the project of this new research coalition.

The proposed project is ambitious but it appears feasible due to the excellence of the team and its members. Most of the techniques that will be employed are mastered by them. External researchers to the team will provide additional assistance when required (e.g. fMRI). Globally, this research strategy holds great promise and its feasibility appears also assured by the funding that is already available.

Conclusion

 Strengths and opportunities:

The strength of the team clearly lies in the unique combination of competences, combining methodological and content-related expertise. The integration of this team within the same research axis of the team "Cerebral, Dynamics, Plasticity, Learning" who has great expertise in computational neuroscience is promising.

 Weaknesses and threats:

Although the project will still be feasible without them, it will certainly take a longer time to be accomplished without the recruitment of the two multi-talented postdocs who are currently in the team but who are at a pivotal time in their careers.

 Recommendations:

The members of this team are encouraged to maintain the high quality of their scientific productions. They are highly encouraged to create, as they planned to do, the new and promising collaborations between members of the team who have never worked together before.  Detailed assessments

Assessment of scientific quality and outputs

The team generated 16 publications in 5 years (i.e. 1.07 publications per year per ETP), which is considered a good output in this scientific field. Several of these publications were published in high impact factor journals: like J. of Neuroscience and Development indicating the level of scientific quality as well as the level of attractiveness of their research. The team has in particular identified two new ligands of the MuSK/LRP4 complexe and their sequential role in the neuromuscular junction synaptogenetic process. Their recent discovery of the role of the doublecortin in such process is also of great importance for the field.

Assessment of the unit's academic reputation and appeal

There are several indicators that support the good academic reputation and appeal of this team. First of all, the group leader has been invited for several international seminars and her expertise has been requested by several international research councils. Second, the team recruited one CR2 INSERM researcher and one CR1 CNRS researcher joined the team in the last 3 years. And finally, the amount of financial support over the last years also indicates that this team has an excellent reputation.

Assessment of the unit's interaction with the social, economic and cultural environment

This interaction is clearly expressed by the clinical relevance of this unit's research. The team received several AFM grants and AFM fellowships. Furthermore, the group leader expertise was also used by the AFM council, showing a bidirectional involvement.

Assessment of the unit's organisation and life

Nothing specific to mention for this criteria

Assessment of the unit's involvement in training through research

The involvement of this team in teaching research to students is very big. In short: lecturing student's for 128 hours per year, management of the Master programme (Co-Head) and within this programme managing the Neurobiology programme (Head), management of the PhD programme (Head), training international students at the level of master or PhD and participating in many PhD committees.

Assessment of the five-year plan and strategy

The current five-year plan is a logical continuation of this team's research of the last years. The solid foundation that they created with their research together with the current plan will undoubtedly results in more insight in the factors that are involved in the development of the NMJ. Additionally, the extension of their future research on NMJ pathologies and their collaboration with clinicians will be important for the translation of fundamental NMJ research to clinical applications and will (ultimately) be beneficial for society. This team recruited 2 new researchers and the team grew from 4 to 6 members. Therefore this team can cover a larger research area and can generate a larger scientific output in the coming 5 years.

Conclusion  Strengths and opportunities:

This team is deeply involved in the education and training of master and PhD students on many levels. Due to this involvement, this team has insight in the quality of Paris Descartes students which is important for the selection and recruitment of new excellent young scientists. This is not only important for this team themselves, but also for the entire unit.

Their collaboration with spinal physiology team is an interesting and logical choice, because together their research will cover the entire lifecycle of motor neurons in sickness and health. The committee believes that this collaboration can be very fruitful.

With the enhanced clinical relevance in the new 5 year research plan, the team steps into the 'wellappreciated' field of translation research.

 Weaknesses and threats:

The vitality and commitment of this team to science, education, and health-care is to be commended. The team has a high teaching load and teaching responsibilities (without secretarial support). Therefore, it is important to recognize that the impact of some of these projects may be limited by the inability of these researchers to spend as much time doing research as other scientists without significant teaching. Despite their high teaching load and teaching responsibilities, they maintain a very good standard of publication.

 Recommendations:

The committee encourages the team to continue their translational research and prioritize whenever possible the collaboration with a team having expertise in spinal physiology. In fact the current team can strongly benefit from the electrophysiological know-how of spinal physiology team, whereas such team can strongly benefit from the molecular expertise of the current team.

Histogram

Comments on the report

We are all thankful to the visiting committee for their thorough and in depth evaluation of our project, and we are very glad of their praise on our accomplishments and our scientific plans. In this context, I have little comments to make as project leader.

The committee well noticed that the lack of technical support was our main problem, both within teams and at the scale of the whole unit. This point was emphasized in my presentation of the project. Thanks to the evaluation process, our institutions have become fully aware of our dramatic situation in this respect and are now taking steps to improve it. Our part time CNRS secretary will work full--time for the new unit, and both CNRS and Paris Descartes are committed to give us an appropriate technical support. I am very grateful for their efforts in a difficult economic context. However, we still lack technical support for the moment, not only in Team 1 but also in Teams 2 and 3, in part because of the Sauvadet law, which limits the duration of temporary contracts, and of changes of rules for recruitments on ANR grants.

As stated in the report, a higher priority was put till now on the scientific project than on the management of the new unit. Giving a scientific identity with clear research topics to the new unit was the basis for a sound project. Our next priority, for 2013, is to formalize a new management model for the unit, innovative and taking into account the past experience of the LNP and CESeM teams, to nominate a Vice--Director and to write down the clear rules (laboratory board, budget, common investments, hygiene and safety issues…) that will underlie our collective life. I fully understand the recommendations committee on this point, and I am confident that this will prove rather easy. The four teams have already interacted both within their former units, LNP and CESeM, and in the framework of the Institute of Neuroscience and Cognition, which provides a healthy scientific and social background for the new unit. Let me also recall that my management style allowed to lead successfully the LNP since 2010 while creating and extending the INC with the help and support of two CESeM team leaders involved in the unit.

The animal housing problems mentioned in the report affect not only Team 1 but the whole unit. Researchers in Teams 2 and 3 also lack room for their strains of mice, and a new aviary and A2 facility for viruses is needed by Team 2. Hopefully, all these problems will be solved in a near future thanks to the joint efforts of IFR95, the Biomedical Faculty, CNRS and Paris Descartes University for installing a new animal house. The installation of a High Performance Computing Cluster, with a dedicated technical support, is evoked in the report, and some informal discussions are indeed starting on this issue. If the Biomedical Faculty or Paris Descartes University actually made that move, this would be extremely beneficial for Team 2 (and to a lesser extent Team 3) that is at the forefront of Computational Neuroscience and has important needs in large scale numerical simulations.

4N6

   Team-by-team analysis Team 2: Cerebral Dynamics, Plasticity, Learning Name of team leader: Mr David HANSEL & Ms Carole LEVENES Workforce Other permanent staff (without research duties) N4: Other professors (PREM, ECC, etc.) N5: Other EPST or EPIC researchers (DREM, Postdoctoral students, visitors, etc.) 1 spent at least 12 months in the unit 1 Number of Research Supervisor Qualifications (HDR) taken 1 2 Qualified research supervisors (with an HDR) or similar positions 2  Detailed assessments Assessment of scientific quality and outputs

  Other permanent staff (without research duties) N4: Other professors (PREM, ECC, etc.) N5: Other EPST or EPIC researchers (DREM, Postdoctoral students, visitors

Team workforce Number as at 30/06/2012 Number as at 01/01/2014

				2014-2018
				Number of
				project producers
	N1: Permanent professors and similar positions	2	5	5
	N2: Permanent EPST or EPIC researchers and similar positions	12	13	13
	N3: Other permanent staff (without research duties)	3,2	5
	N4: Other professors (PREM, ECC, etc.)	2	2	2
	N5: Other EPST or EPIC researchers (DREM, Postdoctoral students, visitors, etc.)	3	3	3
	N6: Other contractual staff (without research duties)	2
	TOTAL N1 to N6	24,2	28	23
	Taux de produisants		100,00 %

Unit workforce Number as at 30/06/2012 Number as at 01/01/2014

	Doctoral students	10	10
	Theses defended	2	5
	Postdoctoral students having spent at least 12 months in the unit*	4	3
	Number of Research Supervisor Qualifications (HDR) taken	1	8
	Qualified research supervisors (with an HDR) or similar positions	8	16
	2  Assessment of the unit
	Strengths and opportunities:

Team 1: Spinal Physiology & Pathophysiology Name of team leader: Mr Daniel ZYTNICKI Workforce Team workforce Number as at 30/06/2012 Number as at 01/01/2014 2014-2018 Number of project producers N1: Permanent professors and similar positions

	 Detailed assessments
	Assessment of scientific quality and outputs
	N2: Permanent EPST or EPIC researchers and similar positions	2.5	3	3
	N3: Other permanent staff (without research duties)
	N4: Other professors (PREM, ECC, etc.)
	N5: Other EPST or EPIC researchers (DREM, Postdoctoral students, visitors, etc.)	1	1	1
	N6: Other contractual staff (without research duties)	1	1
	TOTAL N1 to N6	4.5	5	4
	Team workforce	Number as at 30/06/2012	Number as at 01/01/2014
	Doctoral students	2	2
	Theses defended	0	1
	Postdoctoral students having spent at least 12 months in the unit	1	1
	Number of Research Supervisor Qualifications (HDR) taken	0	1
	Qualified research supervisors (with an HDR) or similar positions	2	2

6 

 6 Statistics by field: SVE on 10/06/2013

	Grades
	Critères	C1 Qualité scientifique et production	C2 Rayonnement et attractivité académiques	C3 Relations avec l'environnement social, économique et culturel	C4 Organisation et vie de l'entité	C5 Implication dans la formation par la recherche	C6 Stratégie et projet à cinq ans
	A+	67	62	52	73	65	60
	A	57	67	71	45	65	63
	B	12	7	4	7	6	14
	C	0	0	0	3	0	1
	Non Noté	3	3	12	11	3	1
	Percentages
	Critères	C1 Qualité scientifique et production	C2 Rayonnement et attractivité académiques	C3 Relations avec l'environnement social, économique et culturel	C4 Organisation et vie de l'entité	C5 Implication dans la formation par la recherche	C6 Stratégie et projet à cinq ans
	A+	48%	45%	37%	53%	47%	43%
	A	41%	48%	51%	32%	47%	45%
	B	9%	5%	3%	5%	4%	10%
	C	0%	0%	0%	2%	0%	1%
	Non Noté	2%	2%	9%	8%	2%	1%

Specific points to be mentioned:

The program of the first day visit was adapted together with the director the day before due to the delay of arrival of an expert (snowfall in North America).

Concerning the recruitment of young researchers, the committee is right in pointing out the importance of stabilizing the two post--docs who are playing a pivotal role in Team 3 and are still funded for 18 to 24 months. This is a priority of the new unit together with the recruitment of a young researcher (short listed by CNRS Section 25 this year at her first application) in Team 2 to develop an original project on the cerebellum that will strengthen our interactions with psychiatrists within the INC. A coordinated recruitment policy avoiding sterile concurrence between our candidates should help us to recruit these young researchers. We agreed to support one of them on an assistant-professor position, which makes sense in view of the strong involvement of our unit in the life of Paris Descartes, thanks notably to the strong investment of Team 4 in teaching, and the small proportion of (Assistant--)Professors on the profile of the new unit. Our two other candidates apply to CNRS in different sections (25 and 26). Finally and as noticed by the committee, I intend to strengthen the ties as soon as possible between the two teams constituting each research axis. This will give each axis a critical mass and impressive scientific assets and will help to merge researchers coming from two different labs. I am glad that the visiting committee well appreciated the scientific rationale of our organization and the move of all four teams towards translational research. I am confident that this will translate into a competitive and attracting laboratory with recognized international outreach.

Claude Meunier Directeur de Recherche CNRS


Louis Lévy-Garboua

Claude Montmarquette

REPORTED JOB SATISFACTION: WHAT DOES IT MEAN?

Keywords: J28, C25 Job Satisfaction, experienced wage gaps

We emphasize the major influences of experienced utility gaps or regret, i.e. the difference between what happened and what might have happened, on job satisfaction. The main prediction that we test is that job satisfaction correlates with the wage gaps experienced in the past and present, holding other job-related satisfactions constant, with the possible exception of young workers. We further test that this effect of wage gaps on job satisfaction declines with working experience. We find evidence on a Canadian cross-section that the past matters.

Introduction

Self-reported job satisfaction is a fascinating subjective variable. It is so easy to collect in surveys, seems to relate to the hedonic value of jobs and appears to be a good predictor of quits and union membership. But using subjective variables without knowing what they mean can also be dangerous and misleading. Hence, most economists have cast doubts on the use of subjective variables of this type. The traditional attitude of economists is not defendable in the long run, however, because it cannot be rational to ignore available information of value. [START_REF] Hamermesh | Economic Aspects of Job Satisfaction[END_REF], [START_REF] Freeman | Job Satisfaction as an Economic Variable[END_REF], [START_REF] Borjas | Job Satisfaction, Wages and Unions[END_REF] and, more recently, Clark and Oswald (1996) were the first economists to stress this point and consider job satisfaction as an economic variable. This paper presents a theory of job satisfaction which is consistent with stylized facts and yields new testable implications. This theory requires no radical departure from the conventional theory of choice and utility. Yet, it is also consistent with the robust finding that relative utility matters for satisfaction judgments.

Our central assumption is that job satisfaction expresses the worker's experienced preference for his job. The job satisfaction reported in questionnaires is the mere judgment that the respondent would wish to repeat his past career if he now had to choose again. It indicates how one's experienced sequence of jobs compares with mentally experienced alternatives.

Since the individual is supposed to make an ex post comparison of his jobs with what they might have been, his job satisfaction is a real manifestation of his feeling of regret-rejoicing1 .

Note that we are not saying that job satisfaction elicits one's experienced utility of jobs2 but the difference between two experienced utilities, since it is the sign of this difference which indicates the preference relation between jobs. Thus we account for the relativity of satisfaction judgments in a very simple and natural way. Despite the similarity of words, satisfaction and utility have different, though intimately related, meanings.

By restricting our attention to job satisfaction, we can sharpen the theoretical predictions because the relevant subutility then is the expected present value of jobs. Consequently, the main prediction that we test is that job satisfaction correlates with wage gaps experienced in the past and present and that, as a result of discounting, effects of a given wage gap decline with working experience. This analysis borrows from [START_REF] Hamermesh | Economic Aspects of Job Satisfaction[END_REF], who was the first economist to regress job satisfaction on the current wage gap, and may be seen as an economic adaptation of the goal-achievement gap theory suggested by [START_REF] Michalos | Satisfaction and Happiness[END_REF] in the psychological literature. However, we are the first to posit job satisfaction in a lifecycle framework so explicitly and to test the declining effect of wage gaps with working experience on job satisfaction.

Since most of the previous studies on job satisfaction used cross section data, one goal of the present paper is to provide a simple method for recovering some of the dynamics of the satisfaction judgment from a cross section. We use a Canadian cross-section of employed workers from the General Social Survey (1986) to estimate our model. In section 2, the model of job satisfaction and experienced wage gaps is presented. In section 3, we report empirical evidence on job satisfaction. In section 4, we make concluding remarks.

Job satisfaction and experienced wage gaps

We generally define satisfaction or subjective well-being derived from an experienced good z as an ordinal variable taking discrete values. Assuming for simplicity that individuals compare their own situation with a single alternative, we write the satisfaction judgment for a binary answer (not satisfied-satisfied)3

) ( ) ( 1 * > = z U z U if S ) ( ) ( 0 * ≤ = z U z U if
where * z designates the mentally experienced alternative and U is the individual's utility function. The continuous latent variable

) ( ) ( ) , ( * * * - ≡ z U z U z z S (1)
enables us to rewrite the satisfaction function as

0 ) , ( 1 > = * * z z S if S (2) 0 ) , ( 0 ≤ = * * z z S if
This general definition of satisfaction takes a convenient form when applied to job satisfaction if it can be assumed, as it has become conventional in labor economics, that individuals maximize the expected present value of jobs over a lifetime. Then the latter is the discounted sum of human wealth and the non-pecuniary value of job, and the discounting runs from the beginning of work (conventionally denoted 0). An individual reports satisfaction with his job when he perceives at the survey's period, some time after he has begun to work, that his present job has greater value than the sequence of jobs that he might have taken in the past and that he still may take in the future. But his perception at the survey's period is obviously conditioned by his real experience of job in the past (between 0 and current period, denoted a ) and by his mental experience of outside opportunities until then. Letting a J be an ordinal index of job satisfaction at time a (the individual's index is omitted), we have

     + ≤ + = + > + = * * * * , if 0 if 1 a a a a a a a a a a v H v H J v H v H J (3)
where

+ + + = ∑ = -
, with t y representing experienced wages or earnings at period t, r the discount rate, and

) ( * a a a a V E V E
the expected present pecuniary value of job (outside opportunities) in the future discounted from the current period. The latent variable * a J underlying the job satisfaction index is the discounted sum of experienced wage and non-wage gaps in the past and in the future. Thus,

≡ * a J * = - - + + - + + - ∑ a a a a a a a a t t t t v v r V E V E r y y ) 1 ( ) 1 ( * 1 1 *

, and

(4)

1 = a J if . 0 > * a J = 0 if . 0 ≤ * a J
The experienced preference points at, but does not coincide with, the decision of staying in one's current job. Omitting the non-pecuniary value of jobs to simplify the present discussion, equations (3) and ( 4) indicate that reported job satisfaction means:

, 0 > - * a a eH eH
whereas the decision to stay in the job is governed by: .

0 > - * a a a a V E V E
Neither of these two conditions implies the other, but job satisfaction and the propensity to stay in the current job correlate. In a companion paper, Lévy-Garboua, [START_REF] Lévy-Garboua | Job Satisfaction and Quits: Theory and Evidence from the German Socioeconomic Panel[END_REF] exploit the German Socio-Economic Panel to test predictions of the experienced preference framework for job separations. The foregoing analysis demonstrates that job satisfaction cannot be a consequence, but is rather a cause of job turnover and union affiliation.

In equation ( 4), the discounting runs from the beginning of work. But when does work begin? Two different answers seem natural. A naive answer is that it should begin with the current job; but a worker may be changing jobs within the same firm or have the same kind of job over time in several firms. We argue that successive experiences of a same kind, like successive employment spells, may not be separable from the current job in the total experienced utility of jobs because the "autobiographical self" keeps on storing memories of past salient events, both what happened and what might have happened, since the beginning of life and revising expectations of future events in the light of experience (see [START_REF] Damasio | The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness[END_REF]. In comparing what has been with what might have been, even the remote past may matter as long as the realized and the available, but unrealized, alternative careers differ.

Moreover, the remote past would weigh even more heavily than the present and the future because the discounting goes from the beginning of work to the present and the future.

Thus, two natural ways of defining the "beginning of work" are either the period of entry in the current firm or minimum school-leaving age. Without unusually long panel data, however, it is very difficult to discriminate between these assumptions.

The experienced preference hypothesis can explain at least three important stylized facts about job satisfaction. The first one is the classical statement by [START_REF] Easterlin | Does Economic Growth Improve the Human Lot? Some Empirical Evidence[END_REF][START_REF] Easterlin | Will Raising the Incomes of All Increase the Happiness of All?[END_REF] that raising the incomes of all does not increase the happiness of all. Indeed, a uniform growth of all earnings and unemployment benefits would leave job satisfaction judgments unaffected holding non-wage gaps constant 4 . The second empirical regularity about job satisfaction is that the frequency of reported satisfaction eventually increases with age [START_REF] Hamermesh | Economic Aspects of Job Satisfaction[END_REF][START_REF] Clark | Is Job Satisfaction U-shaped in Age?[END_REF][START_REF] Lévy-Garboua | Reported Job Satisfaction: What Does it Mean?[END_REF].

This means, in the present framework, that the discounted sum of wage and non-wage gaps in the past and in the future is more likely to be positive with rising experience on the job market. Indeed, the past component is increasingly likely to be positive after a sufficient number of years at work, if individuals have rational expectations and capture rents on their job, while the future component gets smaller in absolute value as the remaining life at work diminishes. The third observation that the experienced preference hypothesis can explain is that most people report high levels of job satisfaction. This is actually the case in the present study (see section 3). More broadly, Sousa-Poza and Sousa-Poza (2000) compare average levels of job satisfaction between 21 developed countries 5 and find a high level of satisfaction in all countries, with an unweighted average of 78.7% reporting themselves in the top-three levels of a seven-point scale. The last fact is difficult to explain when job satisfaction is taken to be a direct measure of job's utility. For instance, in the social comparison theory suggested by Clark and Oswald (1996), most workers cannot be above 4 Our argument is limited to job (or income) satisfaction and does not extend to life-satisfaction and happiness reports without a strong caveat. The latter also reflect satisfaction with health, family and social life, and so forth, for which the reference -say, premature death or the presence of a loved spouse and healthy childrenmay vary little with economic growth.

5 They analyzed the data set on Work Orientations from the 1997 International Survey Program. All countries used the same wording for the job satisfaction question and the same seven-point scales for reporting individual answers. the average. An equal number of satisfied and unsatisfied workers would be more in the spirit of a theory which equates satisfaction with utility. By contrast, the relatively high level of reported job satisfaction can be easily understood in the experienced preference framework. Under certainty and stable preferences, a rational person would always be satisfied with a deliberate decision made in the past. It is merely the occurrence of surprises in the outcomes and/or possibilities which makes the posterior preference deviate from the prior.

Equation ( 4) shows that, after controlling for non-wage gaps, the experienced human capital gap is the sole determinant of job satisfaction. This strong implication can be tested on individual data because wage gaps can be estimated as the residuals of an earnings function, and non-wage gaps are best captured in the present framework by job-related satisfaction judgments like the satisfaction with leisure, health and married life. Controlling for job-related satisfaction also allows us to control for unobserved individual heterogeneity since the relevant personality traits 6 are highly correlated with any kind of satisfaction, according to "topdown" theories of subjective well-being, but they are far less likely to correlate with the estimated wage gaps. Finally, the expected present value of wage gaps in the future is unobservable and constitutes in the main the error term of an econometric version of the job satisfaction equation. The latter may correlate with the observed present value of wage gaps in the past and bias the estimated coefficient of such variable. This problem is most acute with young workers because, in long run equilibrium, wage gaps that obtain in early career would exhibit an almost perfectly negative correlation with the expected present value of wage gaps in the future in the presence of human investments and deferred payment schemes. The estimated coefficient of the current wage gap is likely to be severely underestimated for young workers because their expected future wage gaps are unobservable and partly form the residual of the job satisfaction equation. The problem resolves at later stages of the career, if past wage gaps are unobservable or very partially observable, because positive and negative correlations tend to offset each other. The following proposition summarizes the main predictions of the experienced preference hypothesis concerning an econometric version of the job satisfaction equation.

PROPOSITION. Job satisfaction correlates with the wage gaps experienced in the past, holding other jobrelated satisfactions constant. The wage gaps that were experienced at the beginning of work weigh more heavily than those experienced later on.

The coefficient of the current wage gap is likely to be severely underestimated for young workers. The coefficient of current wage gap, if unbiased, should decrease with the duration of working experience.

Empirical evidence on job satisfaction

The main prediction that we test here is that job satisfaction correlates with the wage gaps experienced in the past and present 7 , holding other job-related satisfactions constant, with the possible exception of young workers and that, as a result of discounting, effects of a given wage gap decline with working experience. We use the term "gap" to refer to an estimated difference between the value of observed jobs and outside opportunities at the same moment in time, and we apply the word "experienced" both to the real experience of a job and to the mental experience of the contemporaneous alternative so that it is meaningful to speak of an "experienced gap". Reported job satisfaction will be regressed on wage gaps and other job-related satisfactions (describing the preference for non-pecuniary components of the job and also possibly capturing the effect of unobservable personality traits).

We use a Canadian cross-section of employed workers from the General Social Survey (1986). The working sample consists of 2,600 observations of employed individuals (excluding the self-employed ) reporting positive wages. Respondents were asked to rate their level of overall job satisfaction in three categories: 9.38% were "totally or rather displeased", 42.12% were "rather satisfied" and 47.50% were "fully satisfied". They also reported their satisfaction with respect to leisure, health and marital situation. We run ordered probit regressions8 of job satisfaction on several estimated wage gaps and these jobrelated satisfactions (displeased, or pleased) and include a number of controls like gender, education (four levels), country of birth (Canada or other), mother tongue (English, French or other), linguistic ability, region of residence (Ontario or other), and religion status (no reported religion, or any religion). Since we predict that the coefficient of the current wage gap should decrease with age if there were no bias (it may, in fact, be inversely U-shaped if this coefficient is underestimated for the young), we actually run the same regression on four age groups: 15-24, 25-34, 35-44, and 45 and over. An additional motivation for estimating separate regressions by age group is to take care of cohort effects.

Current wage gap and job satisfaction

In order to facilitate comparison with previous studies, the wage gap is first defined as the residual of an earnings function that explains the annual wage by weeks worked, part time, education, a quadratic of years of potential experience, socio-economic work status (in three categories), marital status (in three categories), and other variables used in the job satisfaction equation. We slightly depart from other studies (e.g., Hamermesh 1977, Clark andOswald, 1996), though, by regressing earnings rather than log earnings because our causative latent variable is additive in wage gaps (see eq. ( 4)). The age-specific earnings functions and summary statistics are shown in Appendix A (Table A1).

A key prediction of the experienced preference model is that any effect that comparison earnings have on job satisfaction be mediated by the discounted sum of experienced wage gaps. We test this prediction by adding other wage variables in the regression and showing that their coefficient is not significantly different from zero but the coefficient of the wage gap is significantly positive. Clark and Oswald (1996) consider the predicted wage along with the current wage in their statistical treatment. An equivalent specification which does not generate the same multicollinearity problem consists in introducing the predicted wage along with the experienced wage gap. 25-34 and 45+, but not so between 15-24 and 25-34 and between 35-44 and 45+. These results are consistent with the prediction that the coefficient of the current wage gap declines

9 By not including wages and comparison wages separately in the regression, but only their difference, we avoid the perfect multicollinearity problem faced by Clark and Oswald (1996) for instance. Moreover, we can confidently add variables which also enter the wage equation (mainly gender and education). These variables, which were strongly correlated with wages and comparison wages, are uncorrelated with wage gaps. However, since the wage gap is derived from the data set, it might be objected that significance of this residual in the The definition of the current wage gap adopted in Tables 1 and2 makes the implicit assumption that workers restrict their own market opportunities to a similar occupation, region, hours of work and so forth. This may not be true. Assuming that individual i does not restrict the size of his random search sample of jobs, given his fundamentals (age, education, gender, nationality), an unbiased estimate of current market opportunities is ia y , which attributes to each worker the age-specific average value of the remaining variables listed 14 in Table A1. Hence, ia ia ia y y -≡ ε is an unbiased measure of the current wage gap, which differs from the estimated residual of the experienced earnings equation used in Tables 1 and2, ia ia ia y y -≡ ε . The latter is a more adequate measure of current wage gap if the worker decides to restrict the size of his search sample to job offers that fall exactly under his own current situation. Whether ia ε or ia εˆ is a better measure is an empirical question that will be tested.

At the beginning of active life, the young knows his fundamentals (education, gender, nationality) and searches for a job. As noted by [START_REF] Manski | Adolescent Econometricians: How Do Youth Infer the Returns to Schooling?[END_REF], youth who are forming earnings expectations confront the same inferential problems as do econometricians when they study the returns to schooling and experience. If they base their own expectation on what older workers with the same fundamentals currently earn on the market, they will form an (inflation-adjusted) estimate which precisely matches the prediction of a cross-sectional earnings equation based on this short list of fundamentals and a quadratic of potential experience (shown in the working paper). The latter is taken here as a good predictor of expected earnings at the beginning of work. In actuality, the young will experience many unpredicted features of his life that will have an incidence on his future activity, like his marital status, region of residence, occupation, hours of work, health and so forth. These will cause his experienced earnings to diverge from the earnings predicted at the beginning of Although, on cross-section data, each of these two values is probably biased by a large cohort-specific experience effect, their difference is an unbiased estimate of the past experienced wage gap when both experience effects are equal. We further allow for a potential cross-section bias when successive cohorts differ by adding a cohort-specific constant a α to the job satisfaction equation. 11 This brings another motivation for splitting the sample by age group.

Putting together the new estimates of past and current wage gaps, we finally get a two-period specification of age group-specific job satisfaction

ia ia a i a i a a i a Z J ς ε ε β α + Ψ + Ψ + + = * ) ( 1 1 , (5)
where ia ς is a random disturbance which reflects both the expected present value of wage gaps in the future and the unmeasured part of discounted wage gaps in the past. The crucial assumptions are that 1 Ψ and a Ψ are positive, 1 Ψ is constant across age groups, a Ψ is likely to be inversely U-shaped, and

a a r) 1 ( 1 + = Ψ Ψ
in which a indicates the mean working experience (current age-minimum school-leaving age) or tenure in one age group.

[Insert Table 3 here.]

The results of the estimation of equation ( 5) are shown in Interestingly, these estimates of the discount rate fall well within the range of many estimates of the rate of return on human capital found in the literature.

All the estimations were done correcting for multiplicative heteroskedasticity of the second stage estimation with the experience variable. The estimates of this variable's coefficient are always negative, and statistically significant in two regressions (see Table 3). The negative value suggests that the residual variance in the level of reported job satisfaction decreases with the labor market experience of individuals. This result is consistent with the fact that the future part of human wealth gap (see equation ( 4)) is in the residual and decreases with experience on average as the span of the remaining working life decreases.

Looking at other coefficients in the ordered probit regressions of Table 3 yields additional insights. Job-related satisfactions with health, leisure, and marital status, which capture nonwage gaps and unobserved individual heterogeneity, logically exert significant and substantial effects. Not surprisingly, leisure is increasingly valued with age; and bad surprises about health or marriage are less strongly felt by the older individuals as they are then to be less unexpected. Job satisfaction appears to increase with the level of education. In the experienced preference framework, such dependence is suggestive of job rationing which would thus decrease with education level. This is consistent with the fair wage-effort hypothesis put forward by [START_REF] Akerlof | The Fair Wage-Effort Hypothesis and Unemployment[END_REF] according to which firms are willing to share rents with the more educated workers at the expense of rationing the less educated. A positive effect of education on happiness and satisfaction holding income constant has generally been found in the literature (see [START_REF] Oswald | Happiness and Economic Performance[END_REF]. One exception, however, is Clark and Oswald (1996) who find greater job satisfaction for the less educated on British data collected in the late 1991. They note that "the low satisfaction of the higher educated might then just result from their sharp drop in income relative to those with lower qualifications, due to the recession that hit the middle class unexpectedly hard in Britain in the early 1990s". This may be interpreted as indirect evidence that the unexpected drop experienced in the past had a persistent effect on satisfaction as we assume in this paper. The independence between the level of satisfaction and gender of the respondent is never rejected on our data. Such result is not surprising even though a few studies have found that women were more satisfied with their job than men (e.g. [START_REF] Clark | Job Satisfaction and Gender: Why Are Women So Happy at Work?[END_REF]). Finally, the positive influence of religion on job satisfaction may signify that more religious people show more empathic concern for the experience of currently more unfortunate others, which helps them feel happier with their own lot12 .

How do the results of this two-period specification compare with the simpler current wage gap model reported in Table 2 ? The simpler model is not nested in this two-period specification, but it is not difficult to specify another model which nests these two models since ) ( ˆia ia ia ia y y --

= ε ε

. A test is presented along these lines in Appendix B, that shows that equation ( 5) is to be preferred to the simpler model reported in Table 2. Thus, our results indicate that market opportunities are not restricted to a similar occupation, region, hours of work and so forth. Moreover, they suggest that past experienced wage gaps matter for job satisfaction.

Concluding remarks

The empirical evidence shown in this paper rather supports the view that selfreported job satisfaction indicates an experienced preference for this job over available opportunities. In simple words, reporting one's satisfaction is the judgment that one would now repeat one's past experience if one had to choose again. Under certainty and stable preferences, a rational person would always be satisfied with a deliberate decision made in the past. It is merely the occurrence of surprises in the outcomes and/or possibilities which makes the posterior preference deviate from the prior.

This new interpretation does not invalidate the empirical findings of psychological and sociological research on the subject, which emphasized the role of discrepancies between objective conditions and a reference on reported satisfaction. It is exactly what the new theory predicts. However, this important result does not require utility to be relative and comparable across persons, because choice and preference are obviously relative and ordinal concepts. Furthermore, the new theory characterizes the reference from where gaps are appreciated as the individual's best alternative at the time he makes a satisfaction judgment.

This comes closest to the pioneering analysis of [START_REF] Hamermesh | Economic Aspects of Job Satisfaction[END_REF], but we believe [START_REF] Festinger | A Theory of Social Comparison Processes[END_REF] Standard errors (in parentheses) are heteroskedasticity-consistent. The reference categories -when more than two categories-are (less than 9 years education), (semi and unskilled workers, farmers and farm laborers).

Appendix B

We present a simple test between the two non-nested models reported in Table 2 and Table 3. The principle of this test is to specify another model which nests these two models since 2, and (B2) nests (B1) and the specification estimated in Table 3 (eq. ( 5)) since the latter follows if

a Ψ ′ ′ = Ψ ′ ′ 2
. The coefficients of the wage gaps and loglikelihoods of eq. ( 5), (B1) and (B2) are reported in Table B1; and the corresponding statistics for (B3) are found in Table 2. For all specifications, the coefficients of past or current wage gaps are close and positive. But the loglikelihoods of (B1) and (B2), which include the past wage gap, are significantly greater at the 5% level than that of (B3), for all age groups except the 15-24 (the negative result in this last case is not surprising since the past and present are hardly distinguishable for the young).

The p-values for rejecting the current-period specification (B3) with respect to the more extensive specification (B2) are 0.0016, 0.0080, 0.033 for respectively the 25-34, 35-44, 45+ age groups; for the alternative two-period specification (B1), the corresponding p-values are 0.1180, 0.042, 0.0601. Moreover, specification (B2) nests the alternative two-period specification (B1) and the latter is rejected by a likelihood ratio test at 1% level in the 25-34

  satisfaction equation might be due to mis-specification. This problem does not seem too serious here because the determinants of earnings are fairly well-known in the literature and it is very unlikely that the earnings equations should be badly mis-specified. The main cause of mis-specification that we can single out from our cross-section data is the inclusion of the effect of individual ability in the wage gap. But this should bias the coefficient of wage gap toward zero in the satisfaction equation because more able workers compare what they earn with their own opportunities while we compute the wage gap by comparing the individual wage with the average wage (in a broad category to which the worker belongs) on the market.

  work and, according to our theoretical interpretation, shape his satisfaction with job. Hence, the estimate of earnings based on a longer list of variables including both predictable and not quite predictable variables (shown in Appendix A) is a good description of experienced, as opposed to predicted, earnings. While current experienced earnings are being observed, past experienced earnings can be inferred from the experienced earnings equation by giving the individually observed values to the fundamentals and the sample's age-specific average value to all remaining variables. The past experienced wage gap difference between the experienced and the expected value of past earnings.

  and (B2) nest the current-period specification (B3) estimated in Table

  Table 1 here> Table 2 estimates the simple version of equation (4) that just relates job satisfaction with the current wage gap 9 , other job-related satisfactions and a few bottom-up variables mentioned above. This model is compared with a null hypothesis relating job satisfaction with the same variables except the current wage gap, which we simply call the "bottom-up" model. The coefficient of the current wage gap is always positive and inversely U-shaped across age groups, the peak being attained in the 25-34 age group. The latter is significant by a Student test at the 5% level (one-tail) in all age groups, but the addition of the current wage gap to the "bottom-up" model does not pass a likelihood ratio test at the same level in the younger and older groups. The coefficients of the current wage gap are further shown to be significantly different, by a Wald test at the 5% level, between25-34 and 35-44 and between

	ε	ia	≡	y	ia	y -	ia	(

Table 1 shows that the coefficient of current comparison earnings, ia y ˆ, is insignificant in the two intermediate age groups after controlling for the current wage gap, ia y being the observed current earnings at age a), nonpecuniary job-related satisfactions, and a few other bottom-up variables, Z . The results were the same for the younger and older cohorts, but are not shown here because none of these two wage variables was significant by a likelihood ratio test at the 5% level. Further tests presented in our working paper (Lévy-Garboua and Montmarquette 1998) rejected the assumption of a non-linear effect of the current wage gap (introduced in a piecewise linear form) which might describe several versions of reference-dependent utility functions. Given the fact that

Clark and Oswald (1996)

either could not reject the hypothesis that the coefficients of current earnings and comparison earnings be equal in absolute value, we believe that our results are consistent with others and corroborate our interpretation of job satisfaction as an experienced preference for the job. <insert

  with the duration of working experience, since all experienced wage gaps are discounted from the beginning of work, and that it is biased toward zero in the 15-24 age group. The insignificance of adding the current wage gap to a bottom-up model in the older age group may further suggest that the weight of omitted past circumstances on job satisfaction is increasing with age (tenure 10 ).By assuming that wages and many job-related characteristics are stochastic and gradually revealed by search and experience, we are further able to construct new unbiased estimates of wage gaps in the current period and at the beginning of work. Thus we can replicate the test on the age structure of coefficients of the current wage gap with these new

	<insert table 2 here>
	3.2. The past matters

estimates. But we can also verify the striking prediction that the wage gap at the beginning of work weighs more heavily than the current wage gap, and check that the coefficient of the former is the same for all age groups. Finally, we are able to recover estimates of the average discount rate from the job satisfaction equation under the additional assumption that work begins with active life.

Table 3 .

 3 The effect of current wage gaps on job satisfaction when no restrictions are assumed on the opportunity set is very similar to what is reported in Table2. The null hypothesis that the coefficients of ia equal in the 25-34 and 35-44 age groups is rejected by a Wald test at the 6% level. The estimated effects of past and current wage gaps are both non-significant at the 5% level (one-tail) for the 15-24, which is consistent with our prediction of a large downward bias in The bottom-up model is not rejected by a likelihood ratio test at the 5% level in this age group. In the three other age groups, the coefficients of past wage gaps are significantly positive at the 5% level (one-tail) and their equality is not rejected by a Wald test at the same level of significance. The ranking of the coefficients of past wage gaps over and above those of current wage gaps provides strong additional evidence in favor of the experienced preference model. This pattern is observed in all age groups, and the coefficients of 1 One interesting feature of the experienced preference model is the theoretical possibility of retrieving the average discount rate from the coefficients of the time-varying wage gaps under the assumption that working opportunities begin at minimum school-leaving age.

	this age group and that	Ψ 1	≅	a Ψ	(for reasonable values of the discount rate) for young
	workers.

ε

11

In practice, the cohort-specific constant is indistinguishable from the lower threshold introduced in the ordered probit regression. The further introduction of experience among the explanatory variables of the job satisfaction equation produced no significant result and was eventually abandoned. are i ε and a i ε are truly apart. Likelihood ratio tests of the equality of the two coefficients reject the null for the 25-34, 35-44 and 45+ age groups at p-values of 0.1052, 0.0392 and 0.0549 respectively. These p-values are reasonable to reject the null, considering

that we are looking for a one-sided test. As it is, the set of results should be quite convincing because it runs counter the loose intuition that more remote events in the past should be discounted.

Table 1 Test of the experienced preference hypothesis

 1 had essentially the same reference in mind in his illuminating theory of social comparison processes.Recognition of the intertemporal dimension of satisfaction judgments significantly improves the empirical content of the theory and illuminates several hidden aspects of human behavior. For instance, older persons appear less sensitive to current gaps than younger ones and gaps experienced in the remote past have greater weight on job satisfaction judgments than what happens at present. These two predictions are reminiscent of the fact that wisdom comes with age and that traumas suffered during childhood have quite persistent effects on Significant at the 1% level. b Significant at the 5% level. One-tail test for wage gaps and two-tail test for predicted wages. Standard errors in parentheses. The model includes job-related satisfactions (with leisure time, health, and marital status) and individual characteristics (male, education, country of birth, mother tongue, religion status). * The loglikelihood for the bottom-up model is -971.3765 for the 25-34 age group and -581.2696 for the 35-44 age group. The constant α and the threshold parameter δ 1 are significant in all models. The coefficients of the Experience variable to account for the heteroskedasticity are negative and significant in all models.

			Age Groups
		25-34	35-44
		(1)	(2)	(1)	(2)
	Current comparison		0.01140		0.00874
	earnings		(0.0071)		(0.058)
	Current wage gap	0.01841 a (0.0044)	0.01839 b (0.0084)	0.00755 b (0.00387)	0.00827 b (0.0041)
	Bottom-up model*	Canadian-borne (+), Satisfied with health, with leisure time, and with marital status (+)	Male (-), Canadian-borne (+), Satisfied with health, with leisure time, and with marital status (+)	Satisfied with health, and with leisure time (+)	Male (-), Satisfied with health, and with leisure time (+)
	Loglikelihood**	-961.7575	-960.5135	-578.3899	-577.2672
	Estimations are corrected for heteroskedasticity with years of potential experience.
	* Variables are indicated when positively (+) or negatively (-) significant at the 5 % level or 10 % level. Other
	included variables (Education, Language, Religion status) are non-significant.

a *

Table 2 Age-specific coefficients of current wage gaps

 2 Significant at the 1 % level(one tail); b at the 5 % level. The bottom-up model omits the current wage gap but includes job-related satisfactions (with leisure time, health, and marital status) and individual characteristics (male, education, country of birth, mother tongue, religion status). Estimations are corrected for heteroskedasticity with years of potential experience.

				Age Groups
		15-24		25-34	35-44		45+
	Current wage gap	01407 . 0	b	a 01841 . 0	007855 . 0	b	005026 . 0	b
		(0.0086)	(0.0044)	(0.00387)	(0.00391)
	Loglikelihood	-386.1336	-961.7575	-578.3899	-403.5040
	Loglikelihood of the bottom-up model	-387.4733	-971.3256	-581.0159	-404.3404

a

Table 3 Age-specific job satisfaction equations including estimates of past and current wage gaps

 3

			Age Groups
		15-24	25-34	35-44	45+
	Past wage gap	0.02784	0.1099 a	0.1854 b	0.1101
		(0.0349)	(0.0547)	(0.0973)	(0.0722)
	Current wage gap (with	0.00869	0.01887 a	0.00891 a	0.00627
	unrestricted opportunity set)	(0.0075)	(0.0039)	(0.0036)	(0.0042)
	Male	0.01703	0.04221	0.3806	0.3265
		(0.109)	(0.098)	(0.253)	(0.217)
	9-13 years education	-0.5156 a	0.02660	0.3044	0.02532
		(0.248)	(0.137)	(0.161)	(0.109)
	13 years education or more	-0.2240	0.1254	0.1708	0.5712 b
	but no university degree	(0.253)	(0.151)	(0.195)	(0.276)
	University degree	0.2447	0.3889 b	1.143 b	0.8233
		(0.321)	(0.172)	(0.545)	(0.582)
	Mother tongue is French	1.0380 a	-0.09214	0.3284	0.2269
		(0.402)	(0.242)	(0.222)	(0.228)
	Mother tongue is English	1.0226 b	-0.1328	0.3053	0.2022
		(0.399)	(0.232)	(0.213)	(0.211)
	Canadian borne	-0.3163	0.2961 b	-0.09746	-0.2680
		(0.198)	(0.134)	(0.112)	(0.182)
	No religion	-0.4589 a	-0.1010	0.1118	-0.3867 b
		(0.152)	(0.104)	(0.120)	(0.188)
	Dissatisfied with health	-0.3658 b	-0.3780 a	-0.3612 a	-0.2723 b
		(0.233)	(0.139)	(0.143)	(0.170)
	Dissatisfied with leisure	0.04198	-0.2556 a	-0.4342 a	-0.6534 a
		(0.210)	(0.115)	(0.137)	(0.235)
	Dissatisfied with marital	-0.4731 a	-0.5697 a	-0.0568	-0.2371 b
	status	(0.215)	(0.144)	(0.168)	(0.154)
	Lower threshold value	0.8527 a	1.0831 a	0.4570 b	0.9132 a
		(0.406)	(0.284)	(0.348)	(0.294)
	Higher threshold value	1.334 a	1.426 a	1.197 a	1.054 a
		(0.134)	(0.119)	(0.173)	(0.256)
	Experience(second stage)	-0.04270 b (0.0279)	-0.00346 (0.008)	-0.01444 b (0.0082)	-0.00898 (0.00739)
	Loglikelihood	-386.6286	-956.9044	-574.9083	-401.2522
	N observations	414	1 040	670	476

a Significant at 1% level; b at 5% level. Standard errors in parentheses. One-tail test for wage gaps, job-related satisfactions, threshold values and experience; two-tail test for the remaining variables. Estimations are corrected for heteroskedasticity with years of potential experience.

Table B1 Three specifications of age-specific job satisfaction including past and current wage gaps

 B1

			Age Groups
		15-24	25-34	35-44	45+
	Equation (3)
	Past wage gap	0.02784	0.1099 a	0.1854 b	0.1101
		(0.0349)	(0.0547)	(0.0973)	(0.0722)
	Current wage gap (with	0.00869	0.01887 a	0.00891 a	0.00627
	unrestricted opportunity	(0.0075)	(0.0039)	(0.0036)	(0.0042)
	set)
	Loglikelihood	-386.6286	-956.9044	-574.9083	-401.2522
	Equation B1
	Past wage gap	0.01968	0.08847 b	0.1680 b	0.1015
		(0.0360)	(0.0550)	(0.0932)	(0.073)
	Current wage gap (with	0.01394	0.01805 a	0.00806 a	0.00583
	restricted opportunity set)	(0.00860)	(0.00435)	(0.00391)	(0.00453)
	Loglikelihood	-385.9919	-960.5360	-576.3246	-401.7373
	Equation B2
	Past wage gap	0.01301	0.1138 a	0.1883 b	0.1112
		(0.0397)	(0.0551)	(0.0986)	(0.0731)
	Net increase in current	-0.00718	0.02235 a	0.01032 b	0.00701
	wage gap when the	(0.0164)	(0.0081)	(0.00616)	(0.0083)
	opportunity set broadens
	Current wage gap (with	0.01393	0.01795 a	0.00846 a	0.00600
	restricted opportunity	(0.0085)	(0.0043)	(0.00410)	(0.0045)
	set)

Loglikelihood -

385.8752 -956.7874 -574.8731 -401.2447

  Standard errors in parentheses. All bottom-up variables and job-related satisfactions are included in the regressions. The latter are corrected for heteroskedasticity with the experience variable.

Note that we define regret in its usual sense of an ex post feeling without assuming that past regret has a direct influence on future decisions nor considering some expected regret ex ante as[START_REF] Bell | Regret in Decision Making under Uncertainty[END_REF] or[START_REF] Loomes | Regret Theory: An Alternative Theory of Rational Choice under Uncertainty[END_REF] do for explaining choices under risk.

By experienced utility of job, we simply mean the decision-utility of job conditional on available information at the time of the survey, including the "surprises" which occurred since the beginning of work.

The analysis is easily extended when more than two answers are allowed (as in the case in the survey we used), by considering several alternative answers in increasing order of value.

[START_REF] Diener | Subjective Well-Being: Three Decades of Progress[END_REF] mention extraversion and neuroticism, self-esteem, optimism and the predisposition to ruminate on the negative events.

The word "present" designates here the immediate past. And, so, "current" period will indicate the latest period before the interview.

The ordered probit model was first estimated by[START_REF] Mckelvey | A Statistical Model for the Analysis of Ordinal Level Dependent Variables[END_REF].Greene (1998: 507) discusses the heteroskedasticity correction in this model.

It is usually assumed that tenure eventually increases with age and experience on the job market.

[START_REF] Ellison | Religious Involvement and Subjective Well-being[END_REF] suggests, in line with our interpretation, that the effects of religion are mainly cognitive, providing an interpretive framework by which one can make sense of his or her experiences.

human satisfaction. The observation that current earnings gaps have a negligible effect on the job satisfaction of young workers is another striking testimony that individuals have a long planning horizon and consciously make on-the-job investments. Such a result is remarkable because studies using training data have often been unable to find consistent evidence of workers paying for their training through lower starting wages. Moreover, the estimated values for the average discount rate fall within the plausible 8-12% range commonly found for rates of return on education and training.

The interpretation of satisfaction judgments discussed in this paper is intuitive and consistent with both the economic theory of utility and reference-dependent behavior. This should make economists less reluctant to exploit the wealth of easy-to-collect subjective data of this kind in econometric studies of job mobility, job matching, union membership, firms' compensation policies, and many other sorts of human behavior. It may also help somewhat bridging the gap between economics and other social or behavioral sciences. age group and at 10% level in the 35-44 age group. On the contrary, (B2), which also nests the two-period specification (3), is unambiguously rejected by a likelihood ratio test in all age groups. Hence, the two-period specification (5) is to be preferred to the current period specification (B3) in all age groups but the young; and to the alternative two-period specification (B2) in the two intermediate age groups. The first result states that the past matters for understanding job satisfaction and subjective well-being research needs to go beyond the benchmark of simple discrepancy theories. This is probably a robust conclusion since it was obtained in spite of the presumably great imprecision of cross-section estimates for past wage gaps, which drives the related coefficients towards zero. The second result shows that workers, perhaps with the exception of older ones, do not limit their search of a job to a small opportunity set.

Appendix A


President Michel Cosnard

Ms Marianne De Visser

Ms Gillian Butler-Browne

Bertrand Mr

Fontaine

Thomas Mr

Braun

Jean-François Mr

Dumas

Mr Nils

Erik Gilhus

Ms Sabrina Pisano

Ircan Nice

Ms Sabrina Sacconi

Marco Mr

Sandri

Kevin Mr

Talbot

Jean-Paul Mr

Lallès

Bruno Mr

Riou

Ms Sylvie Robine

Bertrand Fontaine

INTRODUCTION HISTORY AND GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION OF THE UNIT

The Centre of Research in Myology (CRM) was founded on January 1 st , 2014 (but there was already funding since 2012) at the site of the Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital in Paris.

CRM is set in the particular environment of the Institute of Myology (IM), based on a public-private partnership between the Association Française contre les Myopathies (AFM), represented by the Association Institut de Myologie (AIM -both charitable societies) and by public institutions, UPMC, Inserm, CNRS and AP-HP (Hospital facilities). The IM was founded in 1996 on the site of the university hospital "Pitié-Salpêtrière".

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The interim director, Ms Gillian Butler-Browne, served from October 2015 to the end of December 2017. Since mid-2017 she collaborated with Mr Bertrand Fontaine who will be the director of the CRM for the next mandate.

HCERES NOMENCLATURE

SVE2-1; SVE2-3; SVE3-4; SVE4-1; SVE5-1.

SCIENTIFIC DOMAIN

The Centre of Research in Myology (CRM) has a curiosity-driven research approach focusing on basic research, i.e. muscle biology in its environment. The second pillar is translational research in which the knowledge from basic science is translated into (pre)clinical applications and novel therapies for muscle diseases.

The themes of the 9 teams are the following: inflammatory muscle and innovative therapies, muscle cell organization and therapy of dominant centronuclear myopathy, myomatrix and myonucleus related diseases (genetics and pathophysiology), neuromuscular connectivity in health and diseases, repeat expansion and myotonic dystrophy, signaling pathways and striated muscles, myasthenia gravis: etiology, physiopathology and therapeutic approaches, cell and molecular orchestration in muscle regeneration, ageing and diseases, biotherapies and pathophysiology of neuromuscular disorders.

UNIT WORKFORCE

GLOBAL ASSESSMENT OF THE UNIT

The Centre of Research in Myology (CRM) is a unique young institute, which aims to perform research on unravelling muscle function and muscle disease. The generated knowledge will be applied to finding innovative therapies to ultimately cure patients with neuromuscular disorders. This is greatly facilitated by the strong interaction with the hospital. Some of the team leaders are also clinicians. A notable development, which will strengthen this relationship, is that the unit director will become Head of the Clinical Myology integrated service to be established in the hospital.

CRM includes 9 teams that focus on a limited set of neuromuscular diseases. There is a strong will to strengthen collaboration between the teams, which is currently hampered by their physical separation.

The scientific output (articles in medical journals with a high impact factor, patents, and collaborations with industry) is very good, but there is certainly room for more improvement. This is an institute with high potential in which rejuvenation is taking place. The future director is keen to stimulate new leadership and strives for so-called disruptive discoveries. For that, competitive grants in the EU arena are required.

The evaluation reports of Hceres are available online : www.hceres.com

Evaluation of clusters of higher education and research institutions Evaluation of higher education and research institutions Evaluation of research Evaluation of doctoral schools Evaluation of programmes International evaluation and accreditation

Unit workforce Number 30/06/2017 Number 01/01/2019 Permanent staff

	Supporting personnel (ITAs, BIATSSs and others, notably of EPICs)	18	20
	TOTAL permanent staff	65	79
	Non-permanent staff
	Non-permanent professors and associate professors, including emeritus	0
	Non-permanent full time scientists, including emeritus, post-docs	22
	Non-permanent supporting personnel	0
	PhD Students	29
	TOTAL non-permanent staff	51
	TOTAL unit	116
	Full professors and similar positions	6	9
	Assistant professors and similar positions	11	15
	Full time research directors (Directeurs de recherche) and similar positions	12	14
	Full time research associates (Chargés de recherche) and similar positions	18	21
	Other scientists ("Conservateurs, cadres scientifiques des EPIC, fondations, industries, etc.")	0	0
	High school teachers	0	0

chairman of the expert committee". (Article 11, paragraph 2). committee, the composition of which is specified below. The assessments contained herein are the expression of an independent and collegial reviewing by the committee.