Publikationen
855 Übereinstimmungen gefunden / 1-15 16-30 31-45 46-60 61-75 76-90 91-105 106-120 121-135 136-150 151-165 166-180 181-195 196-210 211-225 226-240 241-255 256-270 271-285 286-300 301-315 316-330 331-345 346-360 361-375 376-390 391-405 406-420 421-435 436-450 451-465 466-480 481-495 496-510 511-525 526-540 541-555 556-570 571-585 586-600 601-615 616-630 631-645 646-660 661-675 676-690 691-705 706-720 721-735 736-750 751-765 766-780 781-795 796-810 811-825 826-840 841-855 856-855
Wettbewerb um Forschungsmittel. Mangelhaft, mittelmäßig oder exzellent: Was kommt raus beim Peer Review?Hornbostel, S. (2020).Wettbewerb um Forschungsmittel. Mangelhaft, mittelmäßig oder exzellent: Was kommt raus beim Peer Review? Forschung & Lehre, 3/20, 206-207. Bonn: Deutscher Hochschulverband. |
SESAME - a synchrotron light source in the Middle East: an international research infrastructure in the making.Rungius, C. (2020).SESAME - a synchrotron light source in the Middle East: an international research infrastructure in the making. In Young, M., Flink, T., & Dall, E. (Hrsg.), Science Diplomacy in the Making: Case-based insights from the S4D4C project (S. 216-253). Berlin, Prag, Wien: Selbstverlag. |
Fragmentierte Sichtbarkeiten: Visualität, Sichtbarkeit und Unsichtbarkeit beim Umgang mit wissenschaftlichem Fehlverhalten.Hesselmann, F., & Reinhart, M. (2020).Fragmentierte Sichtbarkeiten: Visualität, Sichtbarkeit und Unsichtbarkeit beim Umgang mit wissenschaftlichem Fehlverhalten. Kriminologisches Journal, 52(1), 6-20. |
Indikatorenbasierte Berichterstattung zu Promovierenden - Ziele, Referenzen und Erläuterungen der Indikatoren und Kernziffern im Datenportal der National Academics Panel Study.Wegner, A., Seifert, M., & Geils, M. (2020).Indikatorenbasierte Berichterstattung zu Promovierenden - Ziele, Referenzen und Erläuterungen der Indikatoren und Kernziffern im Datenportal der National Academics Panel Study. |
Comparing institutional-level bibliometric research performance indicator values based on different affiliation disambiguation systems.Donner, P., Rimmert, C., & van Eck, N.J. (2020).Comparing institutional-level bibliometric research performance indicator values based on different affiliation disambiguation systems. Quantitative Science Studies, Volume 1 Issue 1, MIT Press, 150-170. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00013 Abstract
The present study is an evaluation of three frequently used institution name disambiguation systems. The Web of Science normalized institution names and Organization Enhanced system and the Scopus Affiliation ID system are tested against a complete, independent institution disambiguation system for a sample of German public sector research organizations. The independent system is used as the gold standard in the evaluations that we perform. We study the coverage of the disambiguation systems and, in particular, the differences in a number of commonly used bibliometric indicators. The key finding is that for the sample institutions, the studied systems provide bibliometric indicator values that have only a limited accuracy. [...] |
Performance and Structures of the German Science System 2020.Stephen, D., Stahlschmidt, S., & Hinze, S. (2020).Performance and Structures of the German Science System 2020. In Expertenkommission Forschung und Innovation (EFI) (Hrsg.), Studien zum deutschen Innovationssystem, 5-2020, Berlin: Expertenkommission Forschung und Innovation (EFI). |
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 |
Transfer of knowledge through international scientific mobility – introduction of a network-based bibliometric approach to study different knowledge types.Aman, V. (2020).Transfer of knowledge through international scientific mobility – introduction of a network-based bibliometric approach to study different knowledge types. Quantitative Science Studies (QSS), 1(2), 565-581, MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00028 |
Investigating Assessment Standards in the Netherlands, Italy, and the United Kingdom: Challenges for Responsible Research Evaluation.Petersohn, S., Biesenbender, S., & Thiedig, C. (2020).Investigating Assessment Standards in the Netherlands, Italy, and the United Kingdom: Challenges for Responsible Research Evaluation. In Jakobs, K. (Hrsg.), Shaping the Future Through Standardization (S. 54-94). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. https://www.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-2181-6.ch003 |
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. |
Kontakt

