2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.hm.2008.10.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Journals under threat: A joint response from history of science, technology and medicine editors

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, the generalization to complex variables is straightforward and does not change our conclusions. For that purpose we use the Bézout's identity [33] stating:…”
Section: Non-harmonic Revival Of Expectation Valuesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the generalization to complex variables is straightforward and does not change our conclusions. For that purpose we use the Bézout's identity [33] stating:…”
Section: Non-harmonic Revival Of Expectation Valuesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With the exception of psychology, economics, and management 3 , research evaluations are highly controversial in the humanities and social sciences. Some initiatives to develop instrument for research assessment in the humanities stirred strong rejections by the scholars (e.g., the European Reference Index for the Humanities, ERIH, see Andersen et al 2009; or the research rating of the German Council of the Science and Humanities, see Plumpe 2009). Therefore, the idea of the project «Developing and Testing Research Quality Criteria in the Humanities» was to learn from these experiences and analyse the reasons for the rejections of evaluation tools and procedures first.…”
Section: Framework To Develop Quality Criteria For Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Third, humanities scholars fear dysfunctional effects of the use of quantitative indicators, e.g. loss of diversity (see Andersen et al 2009). Fourth, there is a lack of consensus on research topics and on the meaningful use of methods.…”
Section: Framework To Develop Quality Criteria For Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%