IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/esrepo/222882.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The role of Open Science in economics. Results report from an online survey among researchers in economics at German higher education institutions in 2019

Author

Listed:
  • Scherp, Guido
  • Siegfried, Doreen
  • Biesenbender, Kristin
  • Breuer, Christian

Abstract

The present quantitative study addresses Open Science practices among researchers in economics at German higher education institutions. In all, the study surveyed 300 scientists from business studies, economics, business informatics, industrial engineering and other economics-related subjects taught at universities, state and private universities of applied sciences, and other higher education institutions such as distance-learning colleges or dual colleges. The study collected information about familiarity, attitude, application, barriers, incentives and support requirements.

Suggested Citation

  • Scherp, Guido & Siegfried, Doreen & Biesenbender, Kristin & Breuer, Christian, 2020. "The role of Open Science in economics. Results report from an online survey among researchers in economics at German higher education institutions in 2019," EconStor Research Reports 222882, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:esrepo:222882
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/222882/1/OS-Studienergebnisse_Layout_eng_final.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mueller-Langer, Frank & Fecher, Benedikt & Harhoff, Dietmar & Wagner, Gert G., 2019. "Replication studies in economics—How many and which papers are chosen for replication, and why?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 48(1), pages 62-83.
    2. Daniel S. Hamermesh, 2013. "Six Decades of Top Economics Publishing: Who and How?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 51(1), pages 162-172, March.
    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. Carmen López-Vergara & Pilar Flores Asenjo & Alfonso Rosa-García, 2021. "Why Open Access: Economics and Business Researchers’ Perspectives," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-17, August.

    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. Mark J. McCabe & Frank Mueller-Langer, 2019. "Does Data Disclosure Increase Citations? Empirical Evidence from a Natural Experiment in Leading Economics Journals," JRC Working Papers on Digital Economy 2019-02, Joint Research Centre.
    2. Pedro Carneiro & Sokbae Lee & Daniel Wilhelm, 2020. "Optimal data collection for randomized control trials," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 23(1), pages 1-31.
    3. Keith Head & Yao Amber Li & Asier Minondo, 2019. "Geography, Ties, and Knowledge Flows: Evidence from Citations in Mathematics," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(4), pages 713-727, October.
    4. Nick Huntington‐Klein & Andreu Arenas & Emily Beam & Marco Bertoni & Jeffrey R. Bloem & Pralhad Burli & Naibin Chen & Paul Grieco & Godwin Ekpe & Todd Pugatch & Martin Saavedra & Yaniv Stopnitzky, 2021. "The influence of hidden researcher decisions in applied microeconomics," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(3), pages 944-960, July.
    5. Alexia Gaudeul & Katharina Gangl & Oliver Kirchkamp & Louisa Kulke, 2024. "The impact of ethical feedback on moral emotions and managerial behavior: a labor market experiment," Jena Economics Research Papers 2024-002, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    6. Holger Strulik & Katharina Werner, 2016. "50 is the new 30—long-run trends of schooling and retirement explained by human aging," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 165-187, June.
    7. Maksym Polyakov & Morteza Chalak & Md. Sayed Iftekhar & Ram Pandit & Sorada Tapsuwan & Fan Zhang & Chunbo Ma, 2018. "Authorship, Collaboration, Topics, and Research Gaps in Environmental and Resource Economics 1991–2015," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(1), pages 217-239, September.
    8. Hudomiet, Péter & Willis, Robert J., 2022. "Computerization, obsolescence and the length of working life," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    9. Seltzer, Andrew J. & Hamermesh, Daniel S., 2018. "Co-authorship in economic history and economics: Are we any different?," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 102-109.
    10. Martina Cioni & Giovanni Federico & Michelangelo Vasta, 2021. "Spreading Clio: a quantitative analysis of the first 25 years of the European Review of Economic History [Plague in seventeenth-century Europe and the decline of Italy: an epidemiological hypothesi," European Review of Economic History, European Historical Economics Society, vol. 25(4), pages 618-644.
    11. Verónica Amarante & Marisa Bucheli & Mariana Rodriguez, 2024. "Research Networks and Publications in Economics: Evidence from a Small Developing Country," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(2), pages 5571-5598, June.
    12. Allen Bellas & Lea-Rachel Kosnik, 2019. "Which leading journal leads? Idea diffusion in economics research journals," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 57(3), pages 901-921, September.
    13. Dreber, Anna & Johannesson, Magnus, 2023. "A framework for evaluating reproducibility and replicability in economics," Ruhr Economic Papers 1055, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    14. Daniel S. Hamermesh & Lea‐Rachel Kosnik, 2024. "Why do older scholars slow down?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 62(1), pages 488-499, January.
    15. Önder Ali Sina & Yilmazkuday Hakan, 2020. "Thirty-Five Years of Peer-Reviewed Publishing by North American Economics PhDs: Quantity, Quality, and Beyond," Open Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 70-85, January.
    16. Donna K. Ginther & Rina Na, 2021. "Does Mentoring Increase the Collaboration Networks of Female Economists? An Evaluation of the CeMENT Randomized Trial," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 111, pages 80-85, May.
    17. Syed Hasan & Robert Breunig, 2021. "Article length and citation outcomes," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7583-7608, September.
    18. Fabian Scheidegger & Andre Briviba & Bruno S. Frey, 2023. "Behind the curtains of academic publishing: strategic responses of economists and business scholars," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4765-4790, August.
    19. Claude Diebolt & Michael Haupert, 2021. "The Role of Cliometrics in History and Economics," Working Papers of BETA 2021-26, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    20. Bev Dahlby & Kevin Milligan, 2017. "From theory to practice: Canadian economists’ contributions to public finance," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(5), pages 1324-1347, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Open Science; Open Science practices; Open Access; Open Data; Transparency; Science;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:zbw:esrepo:222882. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    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.