Studied Sociology, psychology, and communication studies in Dresden, Leipzig and Berlin where he graduated in sociology in 2007. From 2007 and 2010 he worked at the Fraunhofer Institute of Innovation and Systems Research in Karlsruhe in different projects on innovation policy and the governance of emerging technologies. In 2010, he began working as a teaching coordinator, designing and implementing the MA Program "Science Studies" which has been successfully introduced at HU Berlin in 2012. At the same time, he was also involved in a project on the regulation of data practices in German universities. Between December 2013 and 2016 he worked as a research associate in the DFG funded project "Reviews as legitimizing resource in emerging research fields" focusing on the case of synthetic biology. He was also involved in a project on core concepts, organizational and evaluation of Translational Medical Research funded by the Berlin Institute of Health. His research interests include: science and technology studies, innovation studies, network analysis, governance of biomedicine (with a specific focus on synthetic biology), as well as studies into digital scholarly practices. Clemens Blümel joined the DZHW in January 2017.
Clemens Blümel
Research Area Research System and Science Dynamics
Researcher
- +49 30 2064177-31
List of projects
List of publications
On Top of the Hierarchy: How Guidelines Shape Systematic Reviewing in Biomedicine.Schniedermann, A., Blümel, C., & Simons, A. (2022).On Top of the Hierarchy: How Guidelines Shape Systematic Reviewing in Biomedicine. In S. Ehlers & S. Esselborn (Hrsg.), Evidence in Action between Science and Society - Constructing, Validating, and Contesting Knowledge (S. 102-126). New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003188612-8 |
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. |
Quantitative studies of science in Germany.Blümel, C., & Gauch, S. (2021).Quantitative studies of science in Germany. Scientometrics, 126(12) (online first). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04203-7 |
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).(Abgerufen am: 20.10.2021) (online first). https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2021.747562 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? |
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. |
What Synthetic Biology Aims At: Review Articles as Sites for Constructing and Narrating an Emerging Field.Blümel, C. (2021).What Synthetic Biology Aims At: Review Articles as Sites for Constructing and Narrating an Emerging Field. In K. Kastenhofer & S. Molyneux-Hodgson (Hrsg.), Community and Identity in Contemporary Technosciences (Bd. 31, S. 65-84). Cham: Springer Nature (online first). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-61728-8_3 Abstract
The analysis of scientific communities and collectives are central to STS and the sociology of science. Reviewing practices, that is, practices of ordering, defining or delineating scientific fields can be understood as an often neglected, yet prevailing textual practice of community building, particularly in novel and emerging research fields, such as synthetic biology. In this article, I aim to explore the structure and content of review articles as a dedicated scholarly genre in synthetic biology, focusing on the period between 2002 and 2012. |
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. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110646610-026 |
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. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110646610-020 |
Innovations in innovation policy: reconstructing the emergence, legitimation and dynamics of cluster policies in Germany.Blümel, C. (2020).Innovations in innovation policy: reconstructing the emergence, legitimation and dynamics of cluster policies in Germany. Innovation: The European Journal for Social Science Research, Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2020.1798216 |
What Synthetic Biology Aims At: Review Articles as Sites for Constructing and Narrating an Emerging Field.Blümel, C. (2020).What Synthetic Biology Aims At: Review Articles as Sites for Constructing and Narrating an Emerging Field. In Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook. [preprint]. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/npfkv |
Studying review articles in scientometrics and beyond: a research agenda.Blümel, C., & Schniedermann, A. (2020).Studying review articles in scientometrics and beyond: a research agenda. Scientometrics, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03431-7 |
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. |
