IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v27y1998i8p807-821.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The role of funding agencies in the cognitive development of science

Author

Listed:
  • Braun, Dietmar

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Braun, Dietmar, 1998. "The role of funding agencies in the cognitive development of science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 807-821, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:27:y:1998:i:8:p:807-821
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048-7333(98)00092-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. David H Guston, 1996. "Principal-agent theory and the structure of science policy," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 229-240, August.
    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. Viner, Neil & Powell, Philip & Green, Rod, 2004. "Institutionalized biases in the award of research grants: a preliminary analysis revisiting the principle of accumulative advantage," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 443-454, April.
    2. Cristian Mejia & Yuya Kajikawa, 2018. "Using acknowledgement data to characterize funding organizations by the types of research sponsored: the case of robotics research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 883-904, March.
    3. Jue Wang & Philip Shapira, 2011. "Funding acknowledgement analysis: an enhanced tool to investigate research sponsorship impacts: the case of nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 563-586, June.
    4. Remo Fernández-Carro & Víctor Lapuente-Giné, 2016. "The Emperor’s clothes and the Pied Piper: Bureaucracy and scientific productivity," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(4), pages 546-561.
    5. Simon Hirzel & Tim Hettesheimer & Peter Viebahn & Manfred Fischedick, 2018. "A Decision Support System for Public Funding of Experimental Development in Energy Research," Energies, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(6), pages 1-18, May.
    6. Benedetto Lepori & Emanuela Reale & Stig Slipersaeter, 2011. "The Construction of New Indicators for Science and Innovation Policies: The Case of Project Funding Indicators," Chapters, in: Massimo G. Colombo & Luca Grilli & Lucia Piscitello & Cristina Rossi-Lamastra (ed.),Science and Innovation Policy for the New Knowledge Economy, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Schuetzenmeister, Falk, 2010. "University Research Management: An Exploratory Literature Review," Institute of European Studies, Working Paper Series qt77p3j2hr, Institute of European Studies, UC Berkeley.
    8. Laudel, Grit & Gläser, Jochen, 2014. "Beyond breakthrough research: Epistemic properties of research and their consequences for research funding," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1204-1216.
    9. Wilts, Arnold, 2000. "Forms of research organisation and their responsiveness to external goal setting," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 767-781, June.
    10. Lettice, Fiona & Smart, Palie & Baruch, Yehuda & Johnson, Mark, 2012. "Navigating the impact-innovation double hurdle: The case of a climate change research fund," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1048-1057.
    11. Fedderke, J.W. & Goldschmidt, M., 2015. "Does massive funding support of researchers work?: Evaluating the impact of the South African research chair funding initiative," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 467-482.
    12. Rongying Zhao & Xinlai Li & Zhisen Liang & Danyang Li, 2019. "Development strategy and collaboration preference in S&T of enterprises based on funded papers: a case study of Google," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 323-347, October.
    13. repec:dau:papers:123456789/5019 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Wang, Qi & Sandström, Ulf, 2014. "Defining the Role of Cognitive Distance in the Peer Review Process: Explorative Study of a Grant Scheme in Infection Biology," INDEK Working Paper Series 2014/10, Royal Institute of Technology, Department of Industrial Economics and Management.
    15. Benedetto Lepori & Michael Wise & Diana Ingenhoff & Alexander Buhmann, 2016. "The dynamics of university units as a multi‐level process. Credibility cycles and resource dependencies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 2279-2301, December.
    16. Lepori, Benedetto, 2011. "Coordination modes in public funding systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 355-367, April.
    17. Mu-Hsuan Huang & Mei-Jhen Huang, 2018. "An analysis of global research funding from subject field and funding agencies perspectives in the G9 countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 833-847, May.
    18. Morris, Norma, 2002. "The developing role of departments," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 817-833, July.
    19. Albert, Mathieu & Laberge, Suzanne, 2017. "Confined to a tokenistic status: Social scientists in leadership roles in a national health research funding agency," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 137-146.
    20. Henriques, Luisa & Larédo, Philippe, 2013. "Policy-making in science policy: The ‘OECD model’ unveiled," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 801-816.
    21. Buenstorf, Guido & Koenig, Johannes, 2020. "Interrelated funding streams in a multi-funder university system: Evidence from the German Exzellenzinitiative," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(3).
    22. Auranen, Otto & Nieminen, Mika, 2010. "University research funding and publication performance--An international comparison," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 822-834, July.
    23. Fernanda Morillo, 2019. "Collaboration and impact of research in different disciplines with international funding (from the EU and other foreign sources)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(2), pages 807-823, August.
    24. Clemens Blümel, 2018. "Translational research in the science policy debate: a comparative analysis of documents," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(1), pages 24-35.

    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:eee:respol:v:27:y:1998:i:8:p:807-821. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Haili He). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.