Research cluster: Open Science

Start of the project: 2020-Jun-01

The concept of open science influences many contemporary debates about science and its governance. Open science can be understood as a movement, composed of various initiatives that aim to make science more open, transparent and more accessible. Furthermore, a culture of open data enables novel combinations and promises to unleash the full innovative potential of science. Open science can be understood as a reaction to different crises and transformations of the global science system: 1) as a reaction to monopolistic structures in scientific publishing (Open Access), 2) as potential solutions to issues regarding the quality of research, for example the replication crisis (Open Data, Open Trials), 3) as a way to improve peer review processes (Open Peer Review), 4) as a reaction to the changing evaluative frameworks and reward structures (Open Metrics) or as means to strengthen the link between science and society in general (Open University, Citizen Science, Participatory Research). Thus, open science aims to improve all stages in the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge.

Although there is a plethora of such initiatives in science and science policymaking, especially on the European level, only few investigations and critical reflections can be found in higher education research or the science studies. With respect to the various transformations that are on a rise, the Open Science Cluster was formed. It developed a set of research questions that are relevant to the DZHW:

  • 1. How can we understand the debate around open science itself? What are the aims and goals of open science?
  • 2. What does “open” mean and how it is achieved with regards to the different disciplinary cultures? How do different interpretations of “open” impact the production of knowledge, e.g. what are the positive and negative effects, what are the frictions and problems?
  • 3. How do organizations in higher education and research manage open science? What do they identify as challenges or drivers for a successful change management?
  • 4. How can open science practices quantitatively assessed? Will there be new indicators for science and innovations?

Aims of the Open Science Cluster

The aims of the cluster activities can be understood along four areas:

  • 1. Establishing connections between DZHW and research about open science, both external and internal. In doing so, the cluster aims at new collaborations and activities with existing research trends in Germany (Open Science Research)
  • 2. Support initiatives in our own areas, especially making data from higher education research and science studies openly available (Open Science Resources)
  • 3. Develop research-based services for actors from science and science policy (Open Science Services)
  • 4. Reflect and develop our own research practices at DZHW with regards to open science (Open Science Services)

To achieve these aims, the cluster will organize events such as internal and external workshops. In addition, it plans to setup a website with relevant information about open science for scholars from higher education research and science studies.

Show more Show less
Publications

Ideas Lab as funding instrument: navigating tensions in establishing transdisciplinary research projects.

Kaisler, R., Blümel, C., & Palfinger, T. (2024).
Ideas Lab as funding instrument: navigating tensions in establishing transdisciplinary research projects. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews (online first).

Sharing software-evolution datasets: Practices, challenges, and recommendations.

Broneske, D., Kittan, S., & Krüger, J. (2024).
Sharing software-evolution datasets: Practices, challenges, and recommendations. In Association for Computing Machinery (Hrsg.), Proceedings of the ACM on Software Engineering (S. 2051-2074). New York, NY, United States: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11616-024-00852-9

Warum werden Forschungsdaten selten nachgenutzt? Hintergründe und aktuelle Initiativen zu ihrer Erschließung.

Blümel, C. (2024).
Warum werden Forschungsdaten selten nachgenutzt? Hintergründe und aktuelle Initiativen zu ihrer Erschließung. Transfer & Innovation (1/2024).(Abgerufen am: 24.07.2024).

What happens to science when it communicates openly?

Blümel, C., & Fecher, B. (31. Oktober 2023).
What happens to science when it communicates openly [Blogbeitrag]. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10037220
Abstract

The contribution deals with what happens when science opens up and communicates’ and the emerging challenges for future scientific communication.

Preprints in the German news media before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. A comparative mixed-method analysis.

Simons, A., & Schniedermann, A. (2023).
Preprints in the German news media before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. A comparative mixed-method analysis. In I. Broer, S. Lemke, A. Mazarakis, I. Peters, & C. Zinke-Wehlmann (Hrsg.), The Science-Media Interface. On the Relation Between Internal and External Science Communication (S. 53-78). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Saur (online first). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110776546-003
Abstract

Mainstream media widely references scientific publications for claims of factuality and authority. But how did science journalism deal with the sudden surge in preprint publications that provided rapid but often uncertain knowledge during the COVID-19 pandemic? While several studies have investigated various aspects of preprint-based science communication, only a few have focused on the public discourse in Germany, albeit with substantial challenges and controversies. In this mixed-method study, we identified the usage of preprints for 1,006 in about 390,000 German news stories, qualitatively analyzed the contexts of these preprints, and developed codes that reflect the epistemic sentiments. We further compared ...

Wissenschaftskulturen in Deutschland.

Ploder, M., Müller, R., & Blümel, C. (2023).
Wissenschaftskulturen in Deutschland. Eine Studie im Auftrag der VolkswagenStiftung. Hannover: VolkswagenStiftung.

The Field-Specificity of Open Data Practices.

Velden, T., & Tcypina, A. (2023).
The Field-Specificity of Open Data Practices. In International Conference on Science (Hrsg.), 27th International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators (STI 2023). Leiden, Niederlande: ovium.io. https://doi.org/10.55835/64b14ef741aa5b443685f9d3
Abstract

Increasingly, researchers are expected to make their research data openly available. However, scientific fields differ in their research practices and norms for sharing research data. We provide quantitative evidence of differences in data practices and the public sharing of research data at a granularity of field-specificity that is rarely reported in open data surveys. Based on a survey of 8,822 researchers at German Universities, we find considerable variation, within and across disciplines, of data practices and rates of open data sharing. Our findings underline that in order to evaluate rates of public data sharing, a better understanding of the embedding of public data sharing into field-specific research practices is needed.

OpenRewi – Initiative für eine offene Rechtswissenschaft.

Eisentraut, N., & Ebert, S. (2023).
OpenRewi – Initiative für eine offene Rechtswissenschaft. Recht und Zugang (RuZ), 2023(2), 141-148. https://doi.org/10.5771/2699-1284-2023-2-141
Abstract

The article presents the initiative for open jurisprudence “OpenRewi”. The original goal of the initiative is to create a supporting infrastructure and platform for legal scholars who want to publish textbooks and other teaching materials, as well as anthologies, monographs and commentaries openly, i.e. open access. So far, no infrastructure or platform has been established for Open Access book publications that adequately reflects the specific needs of legal publishing. OpenRewi takes up exactly this need and at the same time be an impetus for a reform of legal publication culture.

Exploiting views for collaborative research data management of structured data.

Broneske, D., Wolff, I., Köppen, V., & Schäler, M. (2022).
Exploiting views for collaborative research data management of structured data. In Y.-H. Tseng, M. Katsurai, & H. N. Nguyen (Hrsg.), ICADL 2022: From born-physical to born-virtual: Augmenting intelligence in digital libraries. (S. 360-376). Cham: Springer (online first). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-21756-2_28

Offene Rechtswissenschaft – Chancen einer Open-Science-Transformation.

Eisentraut, N., Ebert, S., Goldberg, K., Nachtigall, R., Petras, M., Ramson, L., & Wasnick, L. (2022).
Offene Rechtswissenschaft – Chancen einer Open-Science-Transformation. Recht und Zugang (RuZ), 2022(1), 50-76. https://doi.org/10.5771/2699-1284-2022-1-50
Abstract

Law as Open Science promises better access to more diverse scholarly literature and teaching or learning materials, transparent writing and citation styles, and more diverse authors, editors and readers. These potentials must be measured against the real existing book market in jurisprudence. So far, the orientation towards the printed monograph and the associated "Open Access fees" and established logics of reputation prevent many possibilities. In this context, an open science transformation would offer the chance to realise the promises of digitisation more extensively than before.

Blurry Access: A Systematic Review of Transparency Literature.

Cruz Romero, R. (2022).
Blurry Access: A Systematic Review of Transparency Literature. Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators (STI 2022).
Abstract

This review of the transparency literature has shown the evolution of the field through the prism of bibliographic and methodological data. In doing so, we have shed light into underlying disparities that go in line with arguments of structural problems and historical relations in socio-political contexts. We have highlighted the irony of the field in researching a topic that, due to determinants beyond the control of scholars (though OA policies may slowly generate a structural change), is in itself little transparent. The blurriness of the state of research in transparency and accountability helps us to address the overall debate of academic production in a critical manner, engaging with issues such as publishing and funding.

MapOSR - A mapping review dataset of empirical studies on Open Science.

Lasser, J., Schneider, J., Lösch, T., Röwert, R., Heck, T., ... & Skupien, S. (2022).
MapOSR - A mapping review dataset of empirical studies on Open Science. F1000Research. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.121665.1
Abstract

Research that investigates respective researchers’ engagement in Open Science varies widely in the topics addressed, methods employed, and disciplines investigated, which makes it difficult to integrate and compare its results. To investigate current outcomes of Open Science research, and to get a better understanding on well-researched topics and research gaps, we aimed at providing an openly accessible overview of empirical studies that focus on different aspects of Open Science in different scientific disciplines, academic groups and geographical regions. In this paper, we describe a data set of studies about Open Science practices retrieved following a PRISMA approach to compile a literature review.

Towards a learning analytics metadata model.

Wolff, I., Broneske, D., & Köppen, V. (2022).
Towards a learning analytics metadata model. In SoLAR Society for Learning Analytics Research (Hrsg.), Companion Proceedings 12th International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.

Offener, agiler, partizipativer? Impulse für ein vielfältiges Forschungs- und Innovationssystem.

Blümel, C. (2022).
Offener, agiler, partizipativer? Impulse für ein vielfältiges Forschungs- und Innovationssystem. Forschung: Politik - Strategie - Management, 14, 68-72.

A first metadata schema for learning analytics research data management.

Wolff, I., Broneske, D., & Köppen, V. (2021).
A first metadata schema for learning analytics research data management. O-Bib. Das Offene Bibliotheksjournal / Herausgeber VDB, 8(4), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.5282/o-bib/5735

Editors between support and control by the digital infrastructure — Tracing the peer review process with data from an editorial management system.

Hartstein, J., & Blümel, C. (2021).
Editors between support and control by the digital infrastructure — Tracing the peer review process with data from an editorial management system. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics (6). https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frma.2021.747562/full (Abgerufen am: 20.10.2021) (online first).
Abstract

Many journals now rely on editorial management systems, which are supposed to support the administration and decision making of editors, while aiming at making the process of communication faster and more transparent to both reviewers and authors. Yet, little is known about how these infrastructures support, stabilize, transform or change existing editorial practices. By exploring process generated data from a publisher’s editorial management system, we investigate the ways by which the digital infrastructure is used and how it represents the different realms of the process of peer review. How does the infrastructure support, strengthen or restrain editorial agency for administrating the process?

FAIR research data management for learning analytics.

Wolff, I., Broneske, D., & Köppen, V. (2021).
FAIR research data management for learning analytics. In Lingnau, A. (Hrsg.), Proceedings of DELFI Workshops 2021 (S. 158-163). Dortmund: Hochschule Ruhr West 2021.

Strukturwandel durch Innovation: Über die performative Verschränkung und Aneignung zweier Streitbegriffe in der Lausitz.

Blümel, C. (2021).
Strukturwandel durch Innovation: Über die performative Verschränkung und Aneignung zweier Streitbegriffe in der Lausitz. In J. Herberg, J. Staemmler, & P. Nanz (Hrsg.), Wissenschaft im Strukturwandel: Die paradoxe Praxis engagierter Transformationsforschung (S. 163-189). München: oekom.

History, Development and Conceptual Predecessors of Altmetrics.

Blümel, C., & Gauch, S. (2021).
History, Development and Conceptual Predecessors of Altmetrics. In Ball, R. (Hrsg.), Handbook Bibliometrics (S. 191-199). Berlin / Boston: De Gruyter Saur.

Academic Social Networks and Bibliometrics.

Blümel, C. (2021).
Academic Social Networks and Bibliometrics. In Ball, R. (Hrsg.), Handbook Bibliometrics (S. 255-264). Berlin / Boston: De Gruyter Saur.

The Open Innovation in Science Research Field: A Collaborative Conceptualisation Approach.

Beck, S., Bergenholtz, C., Bogers, M., Brasseur, T., Conradsen, M. L., Di Marco, D., ... & Xu, S. M. (2020).
The Open Innovation in Science Research Field: A Collaborative Conceptualisation Approach. Industry and Innovation. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2020.1792274

The Valuation of Online Science Communication: A Study Into the Scholarly Discourses of Altmetrics and Their Reception.

Blümel, C., & Gauch, S. (2020).
The Valuation of Online Science Communication: A Study Into the Scholarly Discourses of Altmetrics and Their Reception. Social Sciences Research Network. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3539133

Open Data in Biomedical Research: an exploratory study of perceptions and practices towards Open Data within a biomedical research facility: Berlin: DZHW.

Blümel, C. (2019).
Open Data in Biomedical Research: an exploratory study of perceptions and practices towards Open Data within a biomedical research facility: Berlin: DZHW.

Open Science und Open Innovation: Neue Indikatoren für die Analyse des Wissenschafts- und Innovationssystems im Digitalen Zeitalter.

Blümel, C. (2019).
Open Science und Open Innovation: Neue Indikatoren für die Analyse des Wissenschafts- und Innovationssystems im Digitalen Zeitalter. Berlin: Stifterverband Discussion Paper 1/2019.

Was gewinnen wir durch Open Science und Open Innovation?

Blümel, C., Fecher, B., & Leimüller, G. (2019).
Was gewinnen wir durch Open Science und Open Innovation? Essen: Stifterverband. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1880055

Open Science - a loosely coupled discourse? Comparing Open Science and Open Innovation from a bibliometric point of view.

Blümel, C., & Beng, F. (2018).
Open Science - a loosely coupled discourse? Comparing Open Science and Open Innovation from a bibliometric point of view. In STI 2018 Conference Proceedings. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators. 12-14 September 2018, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Quantitative User Valuation Studies - The case of Altmetrics.

Gauch, S., & Blümel, C. (2018).
Quantitative User Valuation Studies - The case of Altmetrics. In Conference Proceedings. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators (S. 255-266). Leiden, The Netherlands.

Das Potenzial strategischer Öffnung. Stifterverband.

Fecher, B., Leimüller, G., & Blümel, C. (2018).
Das Potenzial strategischer Öffnung. Stifterverband.

Opening up new channels for scholarly review, dissemination, and assessment.

Görögh, E., Sifacaki, E., Vignoli, M., Gauch, S., Blümel, C., Kraker, P., ... & Toli, E. (2017).
Opening up new channels for scholarly review, dissemination, and assessment. OpenSym '17, August 23-25, 2017, Galway, Ireland, ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3125433.3125452
Presentations

Wissenschaftsfeindlichkeit verstehen und entgegenwirken.

Blümel, C., Wandt, J., Fejes, M., & Fecher, B. (2023, November).
Wissenschaftsfeindlichkeit verstehen und entgegenwirken. Vortrag auf der Konferenz Forum Wissenschaftskommunikation, Bielefeld.

Using a field-comparative approach to explain field differences in sharing: Challenges for establishing causality.

Velden, T., & Schwichtenberg, N. (2023, November).
Using a field-comparative approach to explain field differences in sharing: Challenges for establishing causality. Vortrag auf der Konferenz 4S 2023 Honolulu: "SEA, SKY, AND LAND: ENGAGING IN SOLIDARITY IN ENDANGERED ECOLOGIES", Society for Social Studies of Science, Honolulu (online), USA.
Abstract

In our research, we examine the role of sharing of epistemic resources, such as research data, code, samples, or method know-how, for knowledge production in scientific fields. Our focus is on resources that are created in the process of research and shared with researchers or research groups outside of the original context of creation of the resource. Based on a field-comparative ethnographic study of research specialties in the sciences that differ in their epistemic practices, we examine the causal link between epistemic conditions of research on the one hand, and reoccurring patterns of sharing on the other. In our contribution we discuss challenges encountered when deriving causal explanations of field differences in sharing.

Diversity of regional research cultures in the global science system.

Blümel, C. (2023, Oktober).
Moderation der Podiumsdiskussion Diversity of regional research cultures in the global science system auf der Konferenz The Future of Higher Education and Science - A Turn of the Times?, Deutsches Zentrum für Hochschul- und Wissenschaftsforschung (DZHW), Berlin, Deutschland.

Making the invisible differences visible.

Hartstein, J., Tcypina, A., & Fabian, G. (2023, Oktober).
Making the invisible differences visible. Vortrag auf der Konferenz The Future of Higher Education and Science, Leibniz Center for Social Sciences, Leibniz-Universität Hannover & Deutsches Zentrum für Hochschul- und Wissenschaftsforschung (DZHW), Hannover.

The Field-Specificity of Open Data Practices.

Velden, T., & Tcypina, A. (2023, September).
The Field-Specificity of Open Data Practices. Vortrag auf der Konferenz The 27th International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators (STI 2023), CWTS in collaboration with the European Network of Indicator Developers (ENID), Leiden, The Netherlands.
Abstract

Increasingly, researchers are expected to make their research data openly available. However, scientific fields differ in their research practices and norms for sharing research data. We provide quantitative evidence of differences in data practices and the public sharing of research data at a granularity of field-specificity that is rarely reported in open data surveys. Based on a survey of 8,822 researchers at German Universities, we find considerable variation, within and across disciplines, of data practices and rates of open data sharing. Our findings underline that in order to evaluate rates of public data sharing, a better understanding of the embedding of public data sharing into field-specific research practices is needed.

Who writes what? The academic age paterns of review genres in biomedicine.

Schniedermann, A. (2023, September).
Who writes what? The academic age paterns of review genres in biomedicine. Vortrag auf der Konferenz 27th International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators (STI 2023), Leiden, Netherlands. doi.org/10.55835/6441b6d076bb0bb2c9ff4c15

Epistemic Diversity meets Open Science: The Field-Specificity of Data Sharing (Keynote).

Velden, T. (2023, September).
Epistemic Diversity meets Open Science: The Field-Specificity of Data Sharing (Keynote). Vortrag auf der Summer School Approaches to Research on Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (HoBid 2023), Paderborn, Deutschland.
Abstract

Increasingly, researchers are expected to make their research data openly available. In this keynote, I provide an overview of the state-of-the-art in research on the sharing of research data with a particular emphasis on understanding field-specific motivations of researchers to share or not to share.

How can new standards fix biomedical research?

Schniedermann, A. (2023, Mai).
How can new standards fix biomedical research? Poster auf der Tagung Forschungstag 2023, DZHW, Hannover.

Digitalization of Science Communication & Scholarly Communication.

Blümel, C. (2023, April).
Digitalization of Science Communication & Scholarly Communication. Impulsvortrag auf der Tagung Talking about Zoonoses - how to communicate science, Nationale Forschungsplattform für Zoonosen, Hannover.

Klausurtagung des DZHW-Forschungsclusters " Open Science " .

Blümel, C., Broneske, D., Daniel, A., Hartstein, J., Schniedermann, A., & Velden, T. (2023, März).
Workshop Klausurtagung des DZHW-Forschungsclusters "Open Science", DZHW, Berlin.

Experiences of authors with standards for biomedical publications.

Schniedermann, A. (2023, März).
Experiences of authors with standards for biomedical publications. Vortrag auf der Konferenz STS-hub.de 2023 | "Circulations", Ingmar Lippert et al., Human Technology Center in Aachen.

The Science of Open Science - Was wissen wir über das Teilen von Forschungsergebnissen?

Velden, T. (21.12.2022).
The Science of Open Science - Was wissen wir über das Teilen von Forschungsergebnissen? Gespräch mit in der D. Siegfried (Moderation), Podcast-Serie "The Future is Open Science". Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft (ZBW) , Berlin.

Exploiting views for collaborative research data management of structured data.

Broneske, D., Wolff, I., Köppen, V., & Schäler, M. (2022, November/Dezember).
Exploiting views for collaborative research data management of structured data. Vortrag auf der Konferenz The 24th International Conference on Asia-Pacific Digital Libraries (ICADL 2022). From born-physical to born-virtual: Augmenting intelligence in digital libraries, Hanoi, Vietnam.

Blurry Access: A Bibliographic Analysis of Transparency Literature.

Cruz Romero, R. (2022, September).
Blurry Access: A Bibliographic Analysis of Transparency Literature. Vortrag im Rahmen der Higher Education Research and Science Studies Summer School (HERSS) 2022, Dortmund.

Blurry Access: A Bibliographic Analysis of Transparency Literature.

Cruz Romero, R. (2022, September).
Blurry Access: A Bibliographic Analysis of Transparency Literature. Vortrag auf der Konferenz 26th International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators (STI 2022), Granada, Spanien.

One Idea and Many Approaches: A Systematic Review of Transparency Literature.

Cruz Romero, R. (2022, Juni).
One Idea and Many Approaches: A Systematic Review of Transparency Literature. Poster auf der Konferenz PolMeth 22, European Political Methodology Association, Hamburg.

Digital contestations of openness: dynamics and frictions in digitized scholarly communication.

Blümel, C. (2022, Mai).
Digital contestations of openness: dynamics and frictions in digitized scholarly communication. Vortrag auf der Konferenz STS Conference Graz 2022, Graz, Österreich.
Abstract

Open Science, it is often held, aims at enhancing the science and society relationship by making science more open, transparent, and accessible to the public, thereby restoring trust in scholarly knowledge production. Yet, in order to restore trust and to make science more accountable to the public, scholars are also expected to more openly communicate their ideas and findings to the public, exploring new channels for communication and interaction with wider audiences. This session aims to explore which frictions such practices of open communication face in the light digitalization.

Not a counterculture: Scientific open source software as epistemic infrastructure.

Hartstein, J. (2022, Mai).
Not a counterculture: Scientific open source software as epistemic infrastructure. Vortrag auf der Konferenz "20th Annual STS Conference Graz 2022 – Critical Issues in Science, Technology and Society Studies", Technische Universität Graz, Graz, Österreich.

Towards a learning analytics metadata model.

Wolff, I., Broneske, D., & Köppen, V. (2022, März).
Towards a learning analytics metadata model. Vortrag auf der Konferenz The 12th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference, SoLAR Society for Learning Analytics Research.

Was ist Open Science?

Blümel, C. (2021, November).
Was ist Open Science? Vortrag im Rahmen der Open Data, Open Science, Open Innovation: Das Konzept von „Openness“ in Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft, Universität Potsdam, Potsdam.

FAIR research data management for learning analytics.

Wolff, I., Broneske, D., & Köppen, V. (2021, September).
FAIR research data management for learning analytics. Vortrag auf der Tagung 19. Fachtagung Bildungstechnologien der GI Fachgruppe Bildungstechnologien (DELFI), FH Dortmund und Fernuniversität Hagen, Dortmund, Deutschland.

Explaining field specific forms of sharing – The influence of epistemic conditions.

Velden, T. (2021, Mai).
Explaining field specific forms of sharing – The influence of epistemic conditions. In E. Barlösius & N. Taubert (Vorsitz), In- and Outside Open Science. auf der Konferenz STS Conference Graz 2021 - Critical lssues In Science, Technology and Society Studies, Annual Conference of the Science Technology and Society Unit of the Institute of Interactive Systems and Data Science of Graz University of Technology, the Inter-University Research Centre for Technology, Work and Culture (IFZ) and the Institute for Advanced Studies of Science, Technology and Society (IAS-STS)., Graz, Österreich.
Abstract

Open science advocates and an increasing number of political stakeholders and research funding agencies encourage researchers to publicly share the various instantiations of scientific knowledge that are generated during the research process, in particular research data, but also computer code, method protocols, or material specimens. Critical for the success of this vision is the readiness of research groups to share those tools and resources that they have created. The study I will present seeks to contribute to a theory of field-specific forms of sharing by looking specifically at the question how sharing decisions are influenced by the epistemic conditions for research in a field.

Open Science zwischen Theorie und Bewegung.

Blümel, C. (2021, April).
Open Science zwischen Theorie und Bewegung. Vortrag im Rahmen der Lecture Series: Open Science und Forschungsqualität in Theorie und Praxis, Berlin University Alliance (BUA), Berlin.

A comparative approach to field-specific forms of sharing.

Velden, T., & Schwichtenberg, N. (2020, August).
A comparative approach to field-specific forms of sharing. Vortrag auf der EASST/4S 2020 Locating and Timing Matters: Significance and agency of STS in emerging worlds, 18.8.-21.08.2020, Prague, Czech Republic.

Offene Wissenschaft – mehr Beteiligung?

Blümel, C. (2019, Dezember).
Offene Wissenschaft – mehr Beteiligung? Input auf dem Konvent des Forums für offene Innovationskultur des Stifterverbandes, 6.12.2019, Berlin.

Changing the system for scholarly reward? The emerging metadata landscape of digitized research evaluation.

Blümel, C. (2019, November).
Changing the system for scholarly reward? The emerging metadata landscape of digitized research evaluation. Vortrag auf dem Workshop: Digitalisierte Bewertungspraktiken in Wissenschaft und Hochschule, 14./15.11.2019, Berlin.

Open Science and Open Innovation.

Blümel, C. (2019, Mai).
Open Science and Open Innovation. Vortrag am Ludwig Boltzmann Centre for Open Innovation in Science, Mai 2019, Wien, Österreich.

Field Specific Forms of Open Science.

Velden, T. (2019, Mai).
Field Specific Forms of Open Science. Vortrag auf dem 1st Open Innovation in Science (OIS) Research Workshop, 02.-03.05.2019, Vienna, Austria.

The Valuation of Digital Scholarly Communication: Platforms, Metrics, and Narratives.

Blümel, C. (2019, Februar).
The Valuation of Digital Scholarly Communication: Platforms, Metrics, and Narratives. Invited Talk an der TU München.

Wissenschaft im Wandel.

Blümel, C. (2019, Februar).
Wissenschaft im Wandel. Diskutant in Podiumsdiskussion mit Ijad Madisch, Gründer von ResearchGate an der Medizinischen Hochschule Hannover.

Open Science - a loosely coupled discourse? Comparing Open Science and Open Innovation from a bibliometric point of view.

Blümel, C., & Beng, F. (2018, September).
Open Science - a loosely coupled discourse? Comparing Open Science and Open Innovation from a bibliometric point of view. Vortrag auf der 23rd International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators (STI 2018): " Science, Technology and Innovation indicators in transition " , 12.-14.09.2018, Leiden, Niederlande.
Conferences

5. jurOA-Tagung 2024.

Eisentraut, N. (2024, Oktober).
5. jurOA-Tagung 2024.Von Open Access zu Open Science: Das transformative Potenzial der Digitalisierung für eine Öffnung der Rechtswissenschaft, Prof. Dr. Nikolas Eisentraut und Maximilian Petras für den OpenRewi e.V., Berlin, Deutschland.

Klausurtagung des DZHW-Forschungsclusters " Open Science " .

Blümel, C., Broneske, D., Daniel, A., Hartstein, J., Schniedermann, A., & Velden, T. (2023, März).
Workshop Klausurtagung des DZHW-Forschungsclusters "Open Science", DZHW, Berlin.

Open Up Data Reuse: Wie kann eine neue Forschungsdaten Governance aussehen?

Blümel, C. (2023).
Open Up Data Reuse: Wie kann eine neue Forschungsdaten Governance aussehen auf der Konferenz 9. Konferenz für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsdaten, RatSWD, Berlin.

Grenzen und Chancen der Offenheit? Was Technologiesouveränität und Geopolitik für Innovation in Forschung und Technologie bedeuten.

Blümel, C., Kessler, M. S., & Skupien, S. (2022).
Symposium Grenzen und Chancen der Offenheit? Was Technologiesouveränität und Geopolitik für Innovation in Forschung und Technologie bedeuten im Rahmen der Veranstaltung Grenzen und Chancen der Offenheit, Stifterverband e.V., Deutsches Zentrum für Hochschul- und Wissenschaftsforschung (DZHW), Berlin University Alliance, Center for Open and responsible Research (CORe), Berlin.

Head of Research cluster

Judith Hartstein
Judith Hartstein Head of Research cluster +49 30 2064177-41
David Broneske
Dr. David Broneske Head of Research cluster +49 511 450670-454

Members

Clemens Blümel Dr. Andreas Daniel Prof. Dr. Bernd Kleimann Ulrike Schwabe Dr. Theresa Velden