Theresa Velden studierte Physik an der Universität Bielefeld und dem University College Dublin. Nach mehrjähriger Tätigkeit in verantwortungsvollen Positionen im Bereich wissenschaftliches Publizieren und Informationsmanagement in der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft (1998-2005), wechselte sie an die Cornell University. Sie promovierte dort 2011 in Informationswissenschaften mit dem Nebenfach Science & Technology Studies. In ihrer Promotion untersuchte sie vergleichend das Sharing-Verhalten von Forschungsgruppen in der Physik und Chemie, und entwickelte zur Unterstützung von feldvergleichenden Studien einen innovativen bibliometrisch-ethnographischen Mixed Method Ansatz. Als Postdoc forschte sie anschließend am Department für Information Science der Cornell University sowie an der School of Information der University of Michigan, wo sie unter anderem Herausforderungen in der interdisziplinären Kollaboration in datenintensiven Forschungsprojekten ethnographisch untersuchte. Von 2016-2018 war sie als Marie Curie/IPODI Fellow am Zentrum für Technik und Gesellschaft (ZTG) der Technischen Universität Berlin. Dort vertiefte sie ihre wissenschaftssoziologischen Theorie- und Methodenkenntnisse und befasste sich thematisch mit fachspezifischen Formen von ‚Open Science‘ und Reproduzierbarkeit in der Wissenschaft. Seit August 2018 leitet sie die Nachwuchsgruppe „Fachspezifische Formen von Open Science“ am DZHW.
Dr. Theresa Velden
Abteilung Forschungssystem und Wissenschaftsdynamik
Nachwuchsgruppenleitung
- 030 2064177-51
- 030 2064177-99
Wissenschaftliche Forschungsgebiete
Wissenschaftsforschung, Informationswissenschaft, Integration quantitativer und qualitativer Methoden, Feldvergleichende Studien, Wissenschaftliche Kommunikation & Kollaboration
Liste der Projekte
Liste der Publikationen
The Field-Specificity of Open Data Practices.Velden, T., & Tcypina, A. (2023).The Field-Specificity of Open Data Practices. In International Conference on Science (Hrsg.), 27th International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators (STI 2023). Leiden, Niederlande: ovium.io. https://doi.org/10.55835/64b14ef741aa5b443685f9d3 Abstract
Increasingly, researchers are expected to make their research data openly available. However, scientific fields differ in their research practices and norms for sharing research data. We provide quantitative evidence of differences in data practices and the public sharing of research data at a granularity of field-specificity that is rarely reported in open data surveys. Based on a survey of 8,822 researchers at German Universities, we find considerable variation, within and across disciplines, of data practices and rates of open data sharing. Our findings underline that in order to evaluate rates of public data sharing, a better understanding of the embedding of public data sharing into field-specific research practices is needed. |
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. |
A Case Study of the Epistemic Function of Citations - Implications for Citation-based Science Mapping.Seitz, C., Schmidt, M., Schwichtenberg, N., & Velden, T. (2021).A Case Study of the Epistemic Function of Citations - Implications for Citation-based Science Mapping. In W. Glänzel, S. Heeffer, P.-S. Chi, & R. Rousseau (Hrsg.), Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Scientometrics & Informetrics (S. 1027-1032). Leuven: KU Leuven / International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics (I.S.S.I.). Abstract
The use of citations as indicators of topical relatedness of publications is common in the algorithmic mapping of the structure of science. References to source documents, however, may serve a variety of epistemic functions, and hence represent rather different dimensions of topical relatedness, such as the research methods used, the empirical objects studied, the theoretical resources build on, the research questions pursued, or the external motivation for and relevance of the work. In this case study, we explore the diversity in topical dimensions along which publications are linked in citation networks, by coding the epistemic function of in-text citations. [...] |
The Open Innovation in Science Research Field: A Collaborative Conceptualisation Approach.Beck, S., Bergenholtz, C., Bogers, M., Brasseur, T., Conradsen, M. L., Di Marco, D., ... & Xu, S. M. (2020).The Open Innovation in Science Research Field: A Collaborative Conceptualisation Approach. Industry and Innovation. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2020.1792274 |
How to interpret algorithmically constructed topical structures of research specialties? A case study comparing an internal and an external mapping of the topical structure of invasion biology.Held, M., & Velden, T. (2019).How to interpret algorithmically constructed topical structures of research specialties? A case study comparing an internal and an external mapping of the topical structure of invasion biology. 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. 1933-1939). Edizioni Efesto. ISBN 978-88-3381-118-5. |
Exploration of reproducibility issues in scientometric research.Velden, T., Hinze, S. Scharnhorst, A. Schneider, J.W., & Waltman, L. (2018).Exploration of reproducibility issues in scientometric research. In STI 2018 Conference Proceedings. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators. 12-14 September 2018, Leiden, The Netherlands. |
Comparison of Topic Extraction Approaches and Solutions.Velden, T., Boyack, K., Gläser, J., Koopman, R., Scharnhorst, A., & Wang, S. (2017).Comparison of Topic Extraction Approaches and Solutions. In J. Gläser, A. Scharnhorst & W. Glänzel (eds): Same data - different results? Towards a comparative approach to the identification of thematic structures in science, Special Issue of Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2306-1 |
Infomap Clustering of Direct Citation Network and Topic Affinity Analysis.Velden, T., Yan, S., & Lagoze, C. (2017).Infomap Clustering of Direct Citation Network and Topic Affinity Analysis. In Gläser, J., Scharnhorst, A. & Glänzel, W. (eds): Same data - different results? Towards a comparative approach to the identification of thematic structures in science, Special Issue of Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2299-9 |
The Extraction of Community Structures from Publication Networks to Support Comparative Studies of Field Differences in Scientific Communication.Velden, T., & Lagoze, C. (2013).The Extraction of Community Structures from Publication Networks to Support Comparative Studies of Field Differences in Scientific Communication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (JASIST), 64(12), 2405-2427. |
Explaining Field Differences in Openness and Sharing in Scientific Communities.Velden, T. (2013).Explaining Field Differences in Openness and Sharing in Scientific Communities. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), February 25-27, 2013, San Antonio, TX, USA (pp. 445-458). [Best Paper Nomination]. |
Resolving Author Name Homonymy to Improve Res- olution of Structures in Co-author Networks.Velden, T., Haque, A., & Lagoze, C. (2011).Resolving Author Name Homonymy to Improve Res- olution of Structures in Co-author Networks. In Proceedings of ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL), June 13 – 17, 2011, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (pp. 241–250). [Best Paper Nomination]. |
A New Approach to Analyzing Patterns of Collaboration in Co-authorship Networks - Mesoscopic Analysis and Interpretation.Velden T., Haque, A., & Lagoze, C. (2010).A New Approach to Analyzing Patterns of Collaboration in Co-authorship Networks - Mesoscopic Analysis and Interpretation. Scientometrics, 85(1), 219 – 242. |
Liste der Vorträge & Tagungen
Seit August 2018
Nachwuchsgruppenleiterin am DZHW
2016-2018
Marie-Curie/IPODI-Stipendiatin und Wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin, TU Berlin
2012-2016
Postdoktorand, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
2011-2012
Postdoktorand, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA
2012
Lehrauftrag 'Web-Informationssysteme', Wintersemester 2012, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA
2005-2011
Promotion in Informationswissenschaft, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA
2001-2005
Geschäftsführende Direktorin des Heinz Nixdorf Zentrums für Informationsmanagement in der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, München, Deutschland
1998-2001
Chefredakteurin der wissenschaftlichen online Zeitschrift 'Living Reviews in Relativity', Max-Planck-Institut für Gravitationsphysik, Golm
1990-1997
Diplomstudium Physik, Universität Bielefeld und University College Dublin