IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v25y2016i1p50-61..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determining effects of individual research grants on publication output and impact: The case of the Emmy Noether Programme (German Research Foundation)

Author

Listed:
  • Jörg Neufeld

Abstract

Based on publication data (Web of Science, Thomson Reuters) of 280 applicants (medicine and biology, application years 2000–6) to the Emmy Noether Programme for young scientists provided by the German Research Foundation (DFG), this study investigates the relationship between publication performance in the periods preceding/subsequent to the funding decision and the funding decision itself. This is achieved by calculating a path model in which ‘subsequent publication performance’ serves as outcome variable, ‘past performance’ as an exogenous variable, and ‘funding decision’ as a mediator or treatment variable. The model is calculated for several bibliometric, productivity, and impact indicators.

Suggested Citation

  • Jörg Neufeld, 2016. "Determining effects of individual research grants on publication output and impact: The case of the Emmy Noether Programme (German Research Foundation)," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(1), pages 50-61.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:25:y:2016:i:1:p:50-61.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvv029
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ashish Arora & Alfonso Gambardella, 2010. "The Impact of NSF Support for Basic Research in Economics," NBER Chapters, in: Contributions in Memory of Zvi Griliches, pages 91-115, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Averch, Harvey A., 1989. "Exploring the cost-efficiency of basic research funding in chemistry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 165-172, June.
    3. Godin, Benoit, 2007. "Science, accounting and statistics: The input-output framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1388-1403, November.
    4. Broscheid, Andreas & Gschwend, Thomas, 2003. "Augäpfel, Murmeltiere und Bayes: Zur Auswertung stochastischer Daten aus Vollerhebungen," MPIfG Working Paper 03/7, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    5. repec:adr:anecst:y:2005:i:79-80:p:04 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Belén Álvarez-Bornstein & Adrián A. Díaz-Faes & María Bordons, 2019. "What characterises funded biomedical research? Evidence from a basic and a clinical domain," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 805-825, May.
    2. Wu, Jiang & Ou, Guiyan & Liu, Xiaohui & Dong, Ke, 2022. "How does academic education background affect top researchers’ performance? Evidence from the field of artificial intelligence," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    3. Krist Vaesen & Joel Katzav, 2017. "How much would each researcher receive if competitive government research funding were distributed equally among researchers?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-11, September.
    4. Janne Pölönen & Otto Auranen, 2022. "Research performance and scholarly communication profile of competitive research funding: the case of Academy of Finland," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7415-7433, December.
    5. Gauffriau, Marianne, 2017. "A categorization of arguments for counting methods for publication and citation indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 672-684.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Park, Hyunwoo & Lee, Jeongsik (Jay) & Kim, Byung-Cheol, 2015. "Project selection in NIH: A natural experiment from ARRA," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 1145-1159.
    2. Hu, Albert G.Z., 2020. "Public funding and the ascent of Chinese science: Evidence from the National Natural Science Foundation of China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    3. Brautzsch, Hans-Ulrich & Günther, Jutta & Loose, Brigitte & Ludwig, Udo & Nulsch, Nicole, 2015. "Can R&D subsidies counteract the economic crisis? – Macroeconomic effects in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 623-633.
    4. José Miguel Benavente & Gustavo Crespi & Alessandro Maffioli, 2007. "The Impact of National Research Funds: An Evaluation of the Chilean FONDECYT," OVE Working Papers 0307, Inter-American Development Bank, Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE).
    5. Marco Cozzi, 2020. "Public Funding of Research and Grant Proposals in the Social Sciences: Empirical Evidence from Canada," Department Discussion Papers 1809, Department of Economics, University of Victoria.
    6. Gschwend, Thomas & Pappi, Franz Urban, 2003. "Stimmensplitting und Koalitionswahl," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 03-21, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
    7. Jacqueline N. Lane & Ina Ganguli & Patrick Gaule & Eva Guinan & Karim R. Lakhani, 2021. "Engineering serendipity: When does knowledge sharing lead to knowledge production?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(6), pages 1215-1244, June.
    8. Baruffaldi, Stefano H. & Marino, Marianna & Visentin, Fabiana, 2020. "Money to move: The effect on researchers of an international mobility grant," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(8).
    9. Janger, Jürgen & Schubert, Torben & Andries, Petra & Rammer, Christian & Hoskens, Machteld, 2017. "The EU 2020 innovation indicator: A step forward in measuring innovation outputs and outcomes?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 30-42.
    10. Jürgen Janger & Agnes Kügler, 2018. "Innovationseffizienz. Österreich im internationalen Vergleich," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 61111.
    11. Alina R. Kadyrova, 2015. "Approaches to Statistical Measurement of Advanced Technologies: A Comparative Study," HSE Working papers WP BRP 38/STI/2015, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    12. Morten Henningsen & Torbjørn Hægeland & Jarle Møen, 2015. "Estimating the additionality of R&D subsidies using proposal evaluation data to control for research intentions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 227-251, April.
    13. Giovanni Cerulli, 2012. "Are R&D Subsidies Provided Optimally? Evidence from a Simulated Agency-Firm Stochastic Dynamic Game," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 15(1), pages 1-7.
    14. Anckaert, Paul-Emmanuel & Cassiman, David & Cassiman, Bruno, 2020. "Fostering practice-oriented and use-inspired science in biomedical research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    15. Adam Jaffe, 2008. "The “Science of Science Policy”: reflections on the important questions and the challenges they present," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 131-139, April.
    16. Daniele Archibugi & Francesco Crespi & Mario Denni & Andrea Filippetti, 2009. "The Technological Capabilities of Nations: A Survey of Composite Indicators," QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria, Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 2, May.
    17. Ayoubi, Charles & Pezzoni, Michele & Visentin, Fabiana, 2019. "The important thing is not to win, it is to take part: What if scientists benefit from participating in research grant competitions?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 84-97.
    18. Charles Ayoubi & Michele Pezzoni & Fabiana Visentin, 2017. "The Important Thing is not to Win, it is to Take Part: What If Scientists Benefit from Participating in Competitive Grant Races?," GREDEG Working Papers 2017-27, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    19. Yin, Zhifeng & Liang, Zheng & Zhi, Qiang, 2018. "Does the concentration of scientific research funding in institutions promote knowledge output?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1146-1159.
    20. Grimpe, Christoph, 2012. "Extramural research grants and scientists’ funding strategies: Beggars cannot be choosers?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1448-1460.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:25:y:2016:i:1:p:50-61.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.