Publications

Unfortunately, there is no result available for this search combination

Forschungsinformationssysteme und Ethik: eine doppelte Herausforderung.

Azeroual, O., & Schöpfel, J. (2022).
Forschungsinformationssysteme und Ethik: eine doppelte Herausforderung. Information – Wissenschaft & Praxis, 2022, 73(4), 179-186. https://doi.org/10.1515/iwp-2021-2208

Promovierende in Deutschland. Neue Ergebnisse der Nacaps-Promovierendenstudie.

Wegner, A. (2022).
Promovierende in Deutschland. Neue Ergebnisse der Nacaps-Promovierendenstudie. Forschung & Lehre, 2022(07), 526-527.

Shaping the Qualities, Values and Standards of Science. How Reporting Guidelines Improve the Transparency of Biomedical Research.

Schniedermann, A. (2022).
Shaping the Qualities, Values and Standards of Science. How Reporting Guidelines Improve the Transparency of Biomedical Research. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics. Frontiers, https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2022.846822 (Abgerufen am: 01.07.2022). https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2022.846822

#Hanna, jetzt ist die Zeit der Daten.

Adrian, D. (2022).
#Hanna, jetzt ist die Zeit der Daten. Gastkommentar zur #IchBinHanna-Debatte. "ZEIT Wissen Drei" - Newsletter. Hamburg: Zeitverlag Gerd Bucerius GmbH & Co. KG.

Beschäftigungsbedingungen für junge Forscher*innen - ein empirischer Beitrag zu #IchBinHanna.

Berroth, L., Adrian, D., Briedis, K., & Wegner, A. (2022).
Beschäftigungsbedingungen für junge Forscher*innen - ein empirischer Beitrag zu #IchBinHanna. (DZHW Brief 04|2022). Hannover: DZHW. https://doi.org/10.34878/2022.04.dzhw_brief

How to interpret algorithmically constructed topical structures of scientific fields? A case study of citation-based mappings of the research specialty of invasion biology.

Held, M., & Velden (2022).
How to interpret algorithmically constructed topical structures of scientific fields? A case study of citation-based mappings of the research specialty of invasion biology. Quantitative Science Studies (online first). https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00194
Abstract

Often, bibliometric mapping studies remain at a very abstract level when assessing the validity or accuracy of the generated maps. In this case study of citation-based mappings of a research specialty, we dig deeper into the topical structures generated by the chosen mapping approaches and examine their correspondence to a sociologically informed understanding of the research specialty in question. Our analysis highlights the variety of types of topical relatedness and epistemic interdependency that citations can stand for. Unless we assume that invasion biology is unique, our analysis suggests that global algorithmic field classification approaches that use citation links indiscriminately may struggle to reconstruct research specialties.

Standardisierte Bibliometrische Analyse der HafenCity Universität Hamburg (HCU).

Deutsches Zentrum für Hochschul- und Wissenschaftsforschung (DZHW) (2022).
Standardisierte Bibliometrische Analyse der HafenCity Universität Hamburg (HCU). Hannover: DZHW (nicht zur Veröffentlichung vorgesehen).

Datenportal der National Academics Panel Study (Nacaps) - Ergebnisse der Promovierendenbefragungen 2019 bis 2021.

Gottwald, A., Azeroual, O., & Wegner, A. (2022).
Datenportal der National Academics Panel Study (Nacaps) - Ergebnisse der Promovierendenbefragungen 2019 bis 2021. Berlin: DZHW.

Indikatorenbasierte Berichterstattung zu Promovierenden - Ziele, Referenzen und Erläuterungen der Indikatoren und Kernziffern im Datenportal der National Academics Panel Study. Version 2.0.

Wegner, A. (2022).
Indikatorenbasierte Berichterstattung zu Promovierenden - Ziele, Referenzen und Erläuterungen der Indikatoren und Kernziffern im Datenportal der National Academics Panel Study. Version 2.0. Berlin: DZHW.

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.

Gender disparities in Russian academia: a bibliometric analysis.

Pilkina, M., & Lovakov, A. (2022).
Gender disparities in Russian academia: a bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 2022( 127), 3577-3591. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04383-w

Transparency of open data ecosystems in smart cities: Definition and assessment of the maturity of transparency in 22 smart cities.

Lnenicka, M., Nikiforova, A., Luterek, M., Azeroual, O., Ukpabi, D., Valtenbergs, V., & Machova, R. (2022).
Transparency of open data ecosystems in smart cities: Definition and assessment of the maturity of transparency in 22 smart cities. Sustainable Cities and Society, 2022(82), 103906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.103906

Zwischenbericht Verbund PHOENIX: Autorschaft im Wandel.

Schendzielorz, C. (2022).
Zwischenbericht Verbund PHOENIX: Autorschaft im Wandel. Teilvorhaben: Theorie und Praxis wissenschaftlicher Autorschaft. Berlin: DZHW (nicht zur Veröffentlichung vorgesehen).

A Record Linkage-Based Data Deduplication Framework with DataCleaner Extension.

Azeroual, O., Jha, M., Nikiforova, A., Sha, K., Alsmirat, M., & Jha, S. (2022).
A Record Linkage-Based Data Deduplication Framework with DataCleaner Extension. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 2022(6), 27. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti6040027

Peer reviewers equally critique theory, method, and writing, with limited effect on the final content of accepted manuscripts.

Stephen, D. (2022).
Peer reviewers equally critique theory, method, and writing, with limited effect on the final content of accepted manuscripts. Scientometrics (online first). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04357-y

Contact

Clemens Blümel
Clemens Blümel Acting Head +49 30 2064177-31
Stephan Stahlschmidt
Dr. Stephan Stahlschmidt Acting Head +49 30 2064177-18
Peter van den Besselaar
Prof. Dr. Peter van den Besselaar Acting Head +49 30 2064177-0
Guido Speiser
Dr. Guido Speiser Deputy Head +49 30 2064177-24
Manuela Rosati
Manuela Rosati Assistant +49 30 2064177-0

Projects

All research area projects

Staff

All research area staff

Publications

All research area publications

Presentations and conferences

All research area presentations and conferences