Judith Hartstein
Research Area Research System and Science Dynamics
Researcher
- +49 30 2064177-41
List of projects
List of publications
Trendumfrage Forschungsdateninfrastrukturen 2024.Hartstein, J., Blümel, C., & Klein, D. (2025).Trendumfrage Forschungsdateninfrastrukturen 2024. Daten- und Methodenbericht. Hannover: DZHW. Abstract
The Trend Survey Research Data Infrastructures 2024 is part of the accompanying research of the Basic Services for the National Research Data Infrastructure (Base4NFDI). The trend survey captures the perception, use and evaluation of established and new data infrastructures and services in the German research landscape. The focus in on the perspective of (potential) users. |
Using software for Research: The Role of Transparency, Reputation and Compliance in Practicing Trust.Hartstein, J., Schniedermann, A., & Schwichtenberg, N. (2024).Using software for Research: The Role of Transparency, Reputation and Compliance in Practicing Trust. In Getzinger, G. et al. (Hrsg.), Conference Proceedings of the 22nd STS Conference Graz 2024 (S. 7-29). Graz: Verlag der Technischen Universität Graz. |
Ergebnisse der Trendumfrage Forschungsdateninfrastrukturen 2024.Hartstein, J., & Blümel, C. (2024).Ergebnisse der Trendumfrage Forschungsdateninfrastrukturen 2024. Hannover: Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14093010 |
Qualitätsmessung als Prisma.Biesenbender, S., & Hartstein, J. (Hrsg.) (2024).Qualitätsmessung als Prisma.Forschungsevaluation in der Medizin. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-43683-4 |
Input-Output-Relationen – Zu den Voraussetzungen einer Effizienzmessung medizinischer Fakultäten anhand von Drittmitteln.Hartstein, J. (2024).Input-Output-Relationen – Zu den Voraussetzungen einer Effizienzmessung medizinischer Fakultäten anhand von Drittmitteln. In S. Biesenbender & J. Hartstein (Hrsg.), Qualitätsmessung als Prisma (S. 109-127). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-43683-4_7 |
Creating Interpretative Spaces in and with Digital Infrastructures: How Editors Select Reviewers at a Biomedical Publisher.Hesselmann, F., & Hartstein, J. (2024).Creating Interpretative Spaces in and with Digital Infrastructures: How Editors Select Reviewers at a Biomedical Publisher. Science, Technology, & Human Values. Online Version, https://doi.org/10.1177/01622439241257720 (Abgerufen am: 05.06.2024) (online first). https://doi.org/10.1177/01622439241257720 |
Methodenbericht zur Befragung von wissenschaftlichen und administrativen Beschäftigten an medizinischen Fakultäten im Projekt QuaMedFo (Qualitätsmaße zur Evaluierung medizinischer Forschung).Biesenbender, S., Hartstein, J., Herrmann-Lingen, C., Kratzenberg, A., & Traylor, C. (2022).Methodenbericht zur Befragung von wissenschaftlichen und administrativen Beschäftigten an medizinischen Fakultäten im Projekt QuaMedFo (Qualitätsmaße zur Evaluierung medizinischer Forschung). Hannover: DZHW. https://doi.org/10.21249/DZHW:qmf2021-dmr:1.0.0 Abstract
The survey of scientific and administrative employees at medical faculties in Germany is part of module 7 „Praktikabilität, Akzeptanz und Verhaltenswirksamkeit“ in the collaborative project „Qualitätsmaße zur Evaluierung medizinischer Forschung“ (QuaMedFo). It was planned and conducted in close cooperation of the German Center for Higher Education Research and Science Studies (DZHW) and the Universitätsmedizin Göttingen (UMG) in the first half of 2021. Data preparation was completed in the second half of 2021. https://doi.org/10.21249/DZHW:qmf2021:1.0.0 |
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? |
Analysing Sentiments in Peer Review Reports: Evidence from Two Science Funding Agencies.Luo, J., Feliciani, T., Reinhart, M., Hartstein, J., Das, V., Alabi, O., & Shankar, K. (2021).Analysing Sentiments in Peer Review Reports: Evidence from Two Science Funding Agencies. Quantitative Science Studies. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00156 |
Bewertung in und durch digitale Infrastrukturen.Krüger, A. K., Heßelmann, F., & Hartstein, J. (2021).Bewertung in und durch digitale Infrastrukturen. In F. Meier & T. Peetz (Hrsg.), Organisation und Bewertung (S. 97-124). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-31549-8_5 |
R package description data from CRAN up until 2020.Hartstein, J. (2021).R package description data from CRAN up until 2020. Berlin: Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin. http://dx.doi.org/10.18452/22951 Abstract
R (Ihaka & Gentleman (1996)) is a scientific software programming language, whose software source code can be packaged to be reused by others. The Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN, URL: https://cran.r-project.org/) is a controlled repository for R packages, active since 1997. All software provided on CRAN is licensed as open source. The hereby provided dataset consists of all available description data for R packages on CRAN on January 1, 2021. |
Mehr Daten, mehr Wissen? – Sozialwissenschaftliche Perspektiven auf digitale Datenproduktion und -nutzung.Krüger, A. K., Hartstein, J., & Heßelmann, F. (2019).Mehr Daten, mehr Wissen? – Sozialwissenschaftliche Perspektiven auf digitale Datenproduktion und -nutzung. SocArxiv. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/r8xtm |
Admitting uncertainty: a weighted socio-epistemic network approach to cognitive distance between authors.Hartstein, J. (2019).Admitting uncertainty: a weighted socio-epistemic network approach to cognitive distance between authors. In Catalano, G., Daraio, C., Gregori, M., Moed, H. F., & Ruocco, G (Hrsg.) Proceedings of the 17th Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics (ISSI 2019), Vol. 2, (S. 2043-2052). Edizioni Efesto. ISBN 978-88-3381-118-5. |
List of presentations & conferences
since 10/2016
Researcher at German Centre for Higher Education Research and Science Studies
08/2017
Master of Arts in "Science Studies" at Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
12/2015 - 03/2016
Internship at Berlin Social Science Center within the research unit "Science Policy"
02/2015
Bachelor of Science in "Business Mathematics" at Hochschule für Technik und Wirtschaft Berlin
