Menü
Theresa Velden

Dr. Theresa Velden

Abteilung Forschungssystem und Wissenschaftsdynamik
Nachwuchsgruppenleitung
  • 030 2064177-51
  • 030 2064177-99

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.

Mehr erfahren Weniger anzeigen

Wissenschaftliche Forschungsgebiete

Wissenschaftsforschung, Informationswissenschaft, Integration quantitativer und qualitativer Methoden, Feldvergleichende Studien, Wissenschaftliche Kommunikation & Kollaboration

Projekte

Liste der Projekte

Leider konnte für diese Suchkombination kein Ergebnis gefunden werden
Forschungscluster: Open Science
Forschungscluster: Empirische Methoden der Hochschul- und Wissenschaftsforschung
Nachwuchsgruppe: Fachspezifische Formen von Open Science
Publikationen

Liste der Publikationen

Leider konnte für diese Suchkombination kein Ergebnis gefunden werden

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.

Topic identification challenge.

Boyack, K., Glänzel W., Gläser, J., Havemann, F., Scharnhorst, A., Thijs, B., ... & Waltmann, L. (2017).
Topic identification challenge. Scientometrics, 111(2), 1223-1224.

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.

Communicating Chemistry.

Velden T., & Lagoze, C. (2009).
Communicating Chemistry. Nature Chemistry 1, 673-678.

The Value of New Scientific Communication Models for Chemistry.

Velden, T., & Lagoze, C. (2009).
The Value of New Scientific Communication Models for Chemistry. Whitepaper October 2009.
Vorträge & Tagungen

Liste der Vorträge & Tagungen

Leider konnte für diese Suchkombination kein Ergebnis gefunden werden

Using a field-comparative approach to explain field differences in sharing: Challenges for establishing causality.

Velden, T., & Schwichtenberg, N. (2023, November).
Using a field-comparative approach to explain field differences in sharing: Challenges for establishing causality. Vortrag auf der Konferenz 4S 2023 Honolulu: "SEA, SKY, AND LAND: ENGAGING IN SOLIDARITY IN ENDANGERED ECOLOGIES", Society for Social Studies of Science, Honolulu (online), USA.
Abstract

In our research, we examine the role of sharing of epistemic resources, such as research data, code, samples, or method know-how, for knowledge production in scientific fields. Our focus is on resources that are created in the process of research and shared with researchers or research groups outside of the original context of creation of the resource. Based on a field-comparative ethnographic study of research specialties in the sciences that differ in their epistemic practices, we examine the causal link between epistemic conditions of research on the one hand, and reoccurring patterns of sharing on the other. In our contribution we discuss challenges encountered when deriving causal explanations of field differences in sharing.

Feldklassifikationen und ihre Grenzen aus dem Kontext der Anwendung in der (surveybasierten) feldvergleichenden soziologischen Wissenschaftsforschung.

Velden, T. (2023, November).
Feldklassifikationen und ihre Grenzen aus dem Kontext der Anwendung in der (surveybasierten) feldvergleichenden soziologischen Wissenschaftsforschung. Vortrag im Rahmen des Netzwerktreffens Kompetenznetzwerk Bibliometrie, Kompetenznetzwerk Bibliometrie.
Abstract

Wissenschaftssoziologische Studien bedienen sich gerne des Feldvergleichs, um Eigenheiten von Disziplinen herauszuarbeiten, sowie durch systematischen Vergleich den Einfluss von Feldeigenschaften auf das interessierende Phänomen zu untersuchen. In dem Vortrag wird am Beispiel einer feldvergleichenden surveybasierten Studie zum öffentlichen Teilen von Forschungsdaten der Vorzug einer feingliedrigen Feldklassifikationen wie der DFG Fächerklassifikation für die Erfassung epistemischer Diversität gezeigt, und die Grenzen einer solchen, für andere Zwecke als die der soziologischen Analyse entwickelten Feldklassifikation, diskutiert.

The Field-Specificity of Open Data Practices.

Velden, T., & Tcypina, A. (2023, September).
The Field-Specificity of Open Data Practices. Vortrag auf der Konferenz The 27th International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators (STI 2023), CWTS in collaboration with the European Network of Indicator Developers (ENID), Leiden, The Netherlands.
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.

Epistemic Diversity meets Open Science: The Field-Specificity of Data Sharing (Keynote).

Velden, T. (2023, September).
Epistemic Diversity meets Open Science: The Field-Specificity of Data Sharing (Keynote). Vortrag auf der Summer School Approaches to Research on Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (HoBid 2023), Paderborn, Deutschland.
Abstract

Increasingly, researchers are expected to make their research data openly available. In this keynote, I provide an overview of the state-of-the-art in research on the sharing of research data with a particular emphasis on understanding field-specific motivations of researchers to share or not to share.

Klausurtagung des DZHW-Forschungsclusters " Open Science " .

Blümel, C., Broneske, D., Daniel, A., Hartstein, J., Schniedermann, A., & Velden, T. (2023, März).
Workshop Klausurtagung des DZHW-Forschungsclusters "Open Science", DZHW, Berlin.

The Science of Open Science - Was wissen wir über das Teilen von Forschungsergebnissen?

Velden, T. (21.12.2022).
The Science of Open Science - Was wissen wir über das Teilen von Forschungsergebnissen? Gespräch mit in der D. Siegfried (Moderation), Podcast-Serie "The Future is Open Science". Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft (ZBW) , Berlin.
Abstract

Dr. Theresa Velden, Leiterin der Nachwuchsgruppe „Fachspezifische Formen von Open Science“ am Deutschen Zentrum für Hochschul- und Wissenschaftsforschung, spricht in dieser Folge unseres Podcasts über Formen der Offenheit in der wissenschaftlichen Praxis. Beleuchtet wird insbesondere die Weitergabe von wissenschaftlichen Ressourcen in unterschiedlichen Fachdisziplinen. Dabei kommen auch negative Effekte, wie verlorengehende Kollaborationsmöglichkeiten und weitere Auswirkungen der reduzierten persönlichen Kontakte zwischen Forschenden zur Sprache. Ein weiteres Thema ist der Einsatz von quantitativen Forschungsindikatoren zur Unterstützung qualitativer Bewertungen.

A Case Study of the Epistemic Function of Citations - Implications for Citation-based Science Mapping.

Seitz, C., Schmidt, M., Schwichtenberg, N., & Velden, T. (2021, Juli).
A Case Study of the Epistemic Function of Citations - Implications for Citation-based Science Mapping. Vortrag auf der Konferenz 18th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics (ISSI 2021), International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Leuven, Belgium.

A case study of the epistemic function of citations - Implications for citation-based science mapping.

Velden, T. (2021, Juli).
A case study of the epistemic function of citations - Implications for citation-based science mapping. Vortrag auf der Konferenz 18th Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics (ISSI 2021), KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
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. They may pertain to 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 qualitative case study, we explore the diversity in topical dimensions along which publications are linked in citation networks.

Explaining field specific forms of sharing – The influence of epistemic conditions.

Velden, T. (2021, Mai).
Explaining field specific forms of sharing – The influence of epistemic conditions. In E. Barlösius & N. Taubert (Vorsitz), In- and Outside Open Science. auf der Konferenz STS Conference Graz 2021 - Critical lssues In Science, Technology and Society Studies, Annual Conference of the Science Technology and Society Unit of the Institute of Interactive Systems and Data Science of Graz University of Technology, the Inter-University Research Centre for Technology, Work and Culture (IFZ) and the Institute for Advanced Studies of Science, Technology and Society (IAS-STS)., Graz, Österreich.
Abstract

Open science advocates and an increasing number of political stakeholders and research funding agencies encourage researchers to publicly share the various instantiations of scientific knowledge that are generated during the research process, in particular research data, but also computer code, method protocols, or material specimens. Critical for the success of this vision is the readiness of research groups to share those tools and resources that they have created. The study I will present seeks to contribute to a theory of field-specific forms of sharing by looking specifically at the question how sharing decisions are influenced by the epistemic conditions for research in a field.

A comparative approach to field-specific forms of sharing.

Velden, T., & Schwichtenberg, N. (2020, August).
A comparative approach to field-specific forms of sharing. Vortrag auf der EASST/4S 2020 Locating and Timing Matters: Significance and agency of STS in emerging worlds, 18.8.-21.08.2020, Prague, Czech Republic.

Fachspezifische Formen von Open Science.

Velden, T. (2020, Juni).
Fachspezifische Formen von Open Science. Vortrag auf dem Treffen der UNIWiND Open Science AG, 16.06.2020.

Challenges of interpreting topic maps of research specialties: a case study of invasion biology.

Velden, T. (2019, September).
Challenges of interpreting topic maps of research specialties: a case study of invasion biology. Vortrag auf dem Workshop " Topic Construction " , Technische Universität Berlin, 19.-20.09.2019, Berlin.

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.

Velden, T. (2019, September).
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. Vortrag auf der 17th International Conference of Scientometrics & Infometrics, 02.-09.09.2019, Rome, Italy.

Field Specific Forms of Open Science.

Velden, T. (2019, Mai).
Field Specific Forms of Open Science. Vortrag auf dem 1st Open Innovation in Science (OIS) Research Workshop, 02.-03.05.2019, Vienna, Austria.

Exploration of reproducibility issues in scientometric research.

Velden, T., Hinze, S., Scharnhorst, A., Schneider, J., & Waltman, L. (2018, September).
Exploration of reproducibility issues in scientometric research. Special Track on " Reproducibility in Scientometrics " . 23rd International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators (STI 2018), September 12-14, 2018, Leiden, The Netherlands.
CV
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

Mehr erfahren Weniger anzeigen