Publications
553 Übereinstimmungen gefunden / 1-15 16-30 31-45 46-60 61-75 76-90 91-105 106-120 121-135 136-150 151-165 166-180 181-195 196-210 211-225 226-240 241-255 256-270 271-285 286-300 301-315 316-330 331-345 346-360 361-375 376-390 391-405 406-420 421-435 436-450 451-465 466-480 481-495 496-510 511-525 526-540 541-553
Nutzerhandbuch Nacaps-Datenportal- Funktionen und Indikatoren im Partnerbereich des Datenportals der National Academics Panel Study.Wegner, A., Holland-Cunz, A., & André, G. (2021).Nutzerhandbuch Nacaps-Datenportal- Funktionen und Indikatoren im Partnerbereich des Datenportals der National Academics Panel Study. Berlin: DZHW. |
It’s worth the trouble. On valuation studies and climate change.Frisch, T., Laser, S., Matthäus, S., & Schendzielorz, C. (2021).It’s worth the trouble. On valuation studies and climate change. In: Engels, A. (Hrsg.), economic sociology_the european electronic newsletter22(2). economic sociology_the european electronic newsletter, https://econsoc.mpifg.de/43390/03_Frisch-et-al_Econsoc-NL_22-2_March2021.pdf (Abgerufen am: 12.03.2021). |
A Review of Mark Dennis Robinson, The Market in Mind—How Financialization is Shaping Neuroscience, Translational Medicine and Innovation in Biotechnology.Hendriks, B. (2021).A Review of Mark Dennis Robinson, The Market in Mind—How Financialization is Shaping Neuroscience, Translational Medicine and Innovation in Biotechnology[Rezension des Buchs The Market in Mind—How Financialization is Shaping Neuroscience, Translational Medicine and Innovation in Biotechnology. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2019, 309 pp., ISBN: 9780262536875, von M. Robinson]. Minerva, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11024-021-09432-x, (Abgerufen am: 03.02.2021). |
Evaluating Scientific Impact of Research Infrastructures: The Role of Current Research Information Systems.Fabre, R., Egret, D., Schöpfel, J., & Azeroual, O. (2021).Evaluating Scientific Impact of Research Infrastructures: The Role of Current Research Information Systems. Quantitative Science Studies (online first). https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00111 |
"Problematisch wird es dort, wo sich Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft berühren": Interview mit Felicitas Heßelmann zu Fehlverhalten in der Wissenschaft.Heßelmann, F. (19. Januar 2021)."Problematisch wird es dort, wo sich Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft berühren": Interview mit Felicitas Heßelmann zu Fehlverhalten in der Wissenschaft [Blogbeitrag]. Abgerufen von https://lisa.gerda-henkel-stiftung.de/fehlverhalten |
Manual & Documentation of Doctoral Degree and Career Dataset (DDC) – first version.Tesch, J., Iversen, E., Skålholt, A., Franssen, T., van Honk, J., ... & Wagner-Schuster, D. (2021).Manual & Documentation of Doctoral Degree and Career Dataset (DDC) – first version. Hannover: Zenodo. http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4446431 |
The Competent Bibliometrician–A Guided Tour through the Scholarly and Practitioner Literature.Petersohn, S. (2020).The Competent Bibliometrician–A Guided Tour through the Scholarly and Practitioner Literature. In Ball, R. (Hrsg.), Handbook Bibliometrics (S. 485-496). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Saur. Abstract
Repeated calls for responsible research metrics and professional codes of conduct in evaluative bibliometrics highlight the need to investigate which qualifications and competencies enable a proficient application of bibliometric methods and indicators. Taking competence research as a point of departure, this chapter delineates salient dimensions of professional competence in bibliometric research evaluation by reviewing a selected subset of the literature. The reviewed literature focuses on handbooks, monographs, and scholarly and practitioner articles that introduce theory and methodology of bibliometrics and showcase applications to scholars and practitioners mainly outside of the scientometric research community. |
Contact
