IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/f/pri435.html
   My authors  Follow this author

Christoph Riedl

Personal Details

First Name:Christoph
Middle Name:
Last Name:Riedl
Suffix:
RePEc Short-ID:pri435
http://christophriedl.net/

Affiliation

(50%) Department of Economics
Northeastern University

Boston, Massachusetts (United States)
https://www.northeastern.edu/cssh/economics/
RePEc:edi:ecneuus (more details at EDIRC)

(50%) D'Amore-McKim School of Business
Northeastern University

Boston, Massachusetts (United States)
https://damore-mckim.northeastern.edu/
RePEc:edi:cbneuus (more details at EDIRC)

Research output

as
Jump to: Working papers Articles Chapters

Working papers

  1. Zachary Fulker & Patrick Forber & Rory Smead & Christoph Riedl, 2022. "Spontaneous emergence of groups and signaling diversity in dynamic networks," Papers 2210.17309, arXiv.org.
  2. Michael Foley & Rory Smead & Patrick Forber & Christoph Riedl, 2021. "Avoiding the bullies: The resilience of cooperation among unequals," Papers 2104.08636, arXiv.org.
  3. Ivo Blohm & Christoph Riedl & Johann Fuller & Orhan Koroglu & Jan Marco Leimeister & Helmut Krcmar, 2012. "The Effects of Prediction Market Design and Price Elasticity on Trading Performance of Users: An Experimental Analysis," Papers 1204.3457, arXiv.org.

Articles

  1. Michael Foley & Rory Smead & Patrick Forber & Christoph Riedl, 2021. "Avoiding the bullies: The resilience of cooperation among unequals," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(4), pages 1-18, April.
  2. Zachary Fulker & Patrick Forber & Rory Smead & Christoph Riedl, 2021. "Spite is contagious in dynamic networks," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-9, December.
  3. Balietti, Stefano & Riedl, Christoph, 2021. "Incentives, competition, and inequality in markets for creative production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
  4. Christoph Riedl & Young Ji Kim & Pranav Gupta & Thomas W. Malone & Anita Williams Woolley, 2021. "Quantifying collective intelligence in human groups," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 118(21), pages 2005737118-, May.
  5. Stefano Balietti & Brennan Klein & Christoph Riedl, 2021. "Optimal design of experiments to identify latent behavioral types," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(3), pages 772-799, September.
  6. Christoph Riedl & Victor P. Seidel, 2018. "Learning from Mixed Signals in Online Innovation Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1010-1032, December.
  7. Kevin J. Boudreau & Eva C. Guinan & Karim R. Lakhani & Christoph Riedl, 2016. "Looking Across and Looking Beyond the Knowledge Frontier: Intellectual Distance, Novelty, and Resource Allocation in Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(10), pages 2765-2783, October.
  8. Ivo Blohm & Christoph Riedl & Johann Füller & Jan Marco Leimeister, 2016. "Rate or Trade? Identifying Winning Ideas in Open Idea Sourcing," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 27-48, March.
  9. Christoph Riedl & Norman May & Jan Finzen & Stephan Stathel & Viktor Kaufman & Helmut Krcmar, 2009. "An Idea Ontology for Innovation Management," International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems (IJSWIS), IGI Global, vol. 5(4), pages 1-18, October.

Chapters

  1. Markus Böhm & Stefanie Leimeister & Christoph Riedl & Helmut Krcmar, 2011. "Cloud Computing – Outsourcing 2.0 or a new Business Model for IT Provisioning?," Springer Books, in: Frank Keuper & Christian Oecking & Andreas Degenhardt (ed.), Application Management, pages 31-56, Springer.

Citations

Many of the citations below have been collected in an experimental project, CitEc, where a more detailed citation analysis can be found. These are citations from works listed in RePEc that could be analyzed mechanically. So far, only a minority of all works could be analyzed. See under "Corrections" how you can help improve the citation analysis.

Working papers

  1. Michael Foley & Rory Smead & Patrick Forber & Christoph Riedl, 2021. "Avoiding the bullies: The resilience of cooperation among unequals," Papers 2104.08636, arXiv.org.

    Cited by:

    1. Sun, Ketian & Liu, Yang & Chen, Xiaojie & Szolnoki, Attila, 2022. "Evolution of trust in a hierarchical population with punishing investors," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    2. Zachary Fulker & Patrick Forber & Rory Smead & Christoph Riedl, 2022. "Spontaneous emergence of groups and signaling diversity in dynamic networks," Papers 2210.17309, arXiv.org.

  2. Ivo Blohm & Christoph Riedl & Johann Fuller & Orhan Koroglu & Jan Marco Leimeister & Helmut Krcmar, 2012. "The Effects of Prediction Market Design and Price Elasticity on Trading Performance of Users: An Experimental Analysis," Papers 1204.3457, arXiv.org.

    Cited by:

    1. Cary Deck & David Porter, 2013. "Prediction Markets in the Laboratory," Working Papers 13-05, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.

Articles

  1. Michael Foley & Rory Smead & Patrick Forber & Christoph Riedl, 2021. "Avoiding the bullies: The resilience of cooperation among unequals," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(4), pages 1-18, April.
    See citations under working paper version above.
  2. Zachary Fulker & Patrick Forber & Rory Smead & Christoph Riedl, 2021. "Spite is contagious in dynamic networks," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-9, December.

    Cited by:

    1. Qian, Jun & Zhang, Tongda & Zhang, Yingfeng & Chai, Yueting & Sun, Xiao & Wang, Zhen, 2023. "The construction of peer punishment preference: how central power shapes prosocial and antisocial punishment behaviors," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 442(C).
    2. Zachary Fulker & Patrick Forber & Rory Smead & Christoph Riedl, 2022. "Spontaneous emergence of groups and signaling diversity in dynamic networks," Papers 2210.17309, arXiv.org.

  3. Balietti, Stefano & Riedl, Christoph, 2021. "Incentives, competition, and inequality in markets for creative production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).

    Cited by:

    1. Mohammed R. AlShareef & Ibrahim A. Alrammah & Nasser A. Alshoukani & Abdulaziz M. Almalik, 2023. "The impact of financial incentives on research production: Evidence from Saudi Arabia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(5), pages 3067-3089, May.
    2. Nadia Zahoor & Francis Donbesuur & Arinze Christian Nwoba & Huda Khan, 2023. "Regional expansion of emerging market SMEs: the roles of domestic market environmental uncertainty and international alliance partner diversity," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 613-643, June.

  4. Christoph Riedl & Young Ji Kim & Pranav Gupta & Thomas W. Malone & Anita Williams Woolley, 2021. "Quantifying collective intelligence in human groups," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 118(21), pages 2005737118-, May.

    Cited by:

    1. Wilhelm, Oliver & Kyllonen, Patrick, 2021. "To predict the future, consider the past: Revisiting Carroll (1993) as a guide to the future of intelligence research," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).

  5. Stefano Balietti & Brennan Klein & Christoph Riedl, 2021. "Optimal design of experiments to identify latent behavioral types," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(3), pages 772-799, September.

    Cited by:

    1. Healy, Paul J. & Park, Hyoeun, 2023. "Model selection accuracy in behavioral game theory: A simulation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).

  6. Christoph Riedl & Victor P. Seidel, 2018. "Learning from Mixed Signals in Online Innovation Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1010-1032, December.

    Cited by:

    1. David Clingingsmith & Will Drover & Scott Shane, 2023. "Examining the outcomes of entrepreneur pitch training: an exploratory field study," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 60(3), pages 947-974, March.
    2. Pankaj Kumar & Xiaojin Liu & Akbar Zaheer, 2022. "How much does the firm's alliance network matter?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(8), pages 1433-1468, August.
    3. Tommy Pan Fang & Andy Wu & David R. Clough, 2021. "Platform diffusion at temporary gatherings: Social coordination and ecosystem emergence," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 233-272, February.
    4. Ren, Jie & Han, Yue & Genc, Yegin & Yeoh, William & Popovič, Aleš, 2021. "The boundary of crowdsourcing in the domain of creativity✰," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    5. Haijing Hao & Rema Padman & Baohong Sun & Rahul Telang, 2019. "Modeling social learning on consumers’ long-term usage of a mobile technology: a Bayesian estimation of a Bayesian learning model," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 1-21, March.
    6. Oliver Alexy, 2022. "How flat can it get? From better at flatter to the promise of the decentralized, boundaryless organization," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(1), pages 31-36, March.
    7. Victor P. Seidel & Christoph Riedl, 2023. "How creative versus technical constraints affect individual learning in an online innovation community," Papers 2303.15163, arXiv.org.
    8. Smirnova, Inna & Reitzig, Markus & Alexy, Oliver, 2022. "What makes the right OSS contributor tick? Treatments to motivate high-skilled developers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    9. Muninger, Marie-Isabelle & Mahr, Dominik & Hammedi, Wafa, 2022. "Social media use: A review of innovation management practices," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 140-156.
    10. Wachs, Johannes & Nitecki, Mariusz & Schueller, William & Polleres, Axel, 2022. "The Geography of Open Source Software: Evidence from GitHub," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    11. Tat Koon Koh & Muller Y. M. Cheung, 2022. "Seeker Exemplars and Quantitative Ideation Outcomes in Crowdsourcing Contests," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 265-284, March.
    12. Sheen S. Levine & Michael J. Prietula & Ann Majchrzak, 2022. "Advice in Crisis: Principles of Organizational and Entrepreneurial Resilience," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(4), pages 145-168, December.

  7. Kevin J. Boudreau & Eva C. Guinan & Karim R. Lakhani & Christoph Riedl, 2016. "Looking Across and Looking Beyond the Knowledge Frontier: Intellectual Distance, Novelty, and Resource Allocation in Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(10), pages 2765-2783, October.

    Cited by:

    1. Andrew Shipilov & Frédéric C. Godart & Julien Clement, 2017. "Which boundaries? How mobility networks across countries and status groups affect the creative performance of organizations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 1232-1252, June.
    2. Kok, Holmer & Faems, Dries & de Faria, Pedro, 2022. "Pork Barrel or Barrel of Gold? Examining the performance implications of earmarking in public R&D grants," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    3. Michele Pezzoni & Reinhilde Veugelers & Fabiana Visentin, 2022. "How fast is this novel technology going to be a hit? Antecedents predicting follow-on inventions," Post-Print hal-03494455, HAL.
    4. Ayoubi, Charles & Pezzoni, Michele & Visentin, Fabiana, 2019. "Does it pay to do novel science? The selectivity patterns in science funding," MERIT Working Papers 2019-037, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    5. Nicolas Carayol, 2018. "The Right Job and the Job Right: Novelty, Impact and Journal Stratification in Science," Post-Print hal-02274559, HAL.
    6. Jian Wang & Reinhilde Veugelers & Paula Stephan, 2016. "Bias against Novelty in Science: A Cautionary Tale for Users of Bibliometric Indicators," NBER Working Papers 22180, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Supradeep Dutta & Jenna Rodrigues & Timothy B. Folta, 2023. "Does NIH select the right healthcare ventures through the SBIR grant program?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1206-1220, August.
    8. Jiang Bian & Jason Greenberg & Jizhen Li & Yanbo Wang, 2022. "Good to Go First? Position Effects in Expert Evaluation of Early-Stage Ventures," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(1), pages 300-315, January.
    9. Wang, Jian & Lee, You-Na & Walsh, John P., 2018. "Funding model and creativity in science: Competitive versus block funding and status contingency effects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1070-1083.
    10. Sotaro Shibayama & Jian Wang, 2020. "Measuring originality in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 409-427, January.
    11. Conor O’Kane & Jing A. Zhang & Jarrod Haar & James A. Cunningham, 2023. "How scientists interpret and address funding criteria: value creation and undesirable side effects," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 799-826, August.
    12. Sotaro Shibayama & Deyun Yin & Kuniko Matsumoto, 2021. "Measuring novelty in science with word embedding," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(7), pages 1-16, July.
    13. Brattström, Erik & Hellström, Tomas, 2019. "Street-level priority-setting: The role of discretion in implementation of research, development, and innovation priorities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 240-247.
    14. Elise S. Brezis & Aliaksandr Birukou, 2020. "Arbitrariness in the peer review process," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(1), pages 393-411, April.
    15. Albert Banal-Estañol & Qianshuo Liu & Inés Macho-Stadler & Pérez-Castrillo, 2021. "Similar-to-me effects in the grant application process: Applicants, panelists, and the likelihood of obtaining funds," Economics Working Papers 1801, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    16. Rossello, Giulia & Cowan, Robin & Mairesse, Jacques, 2020. "Ph.D. research output in STEM: the role of gender and race in supervision," MERIT Working Papers 2020-021, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    17. Schweisfurth, Tim & Zaggl, Michael A. & Schöttl, Claus P. & Raasch, Christina, 2017. "Hierarchical similarity biases in idea evaluation: A study in enterprise crowdfunding," Kiel Working Papers 2095, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    18. Mikko Packalen, 2019. "Edge factors: scientific frontier positions of nations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 787-808, March.
    19. Stephen A Gallo & Joanne H Sullivan & Scott R Glisson, 2016. "The Influence of Peer Reviewer Expertise on the Evaluation of Research Funding Applications," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-18, October.
    20. Kwon, Seokbeom, 2022. "Interdisciplinary knowledge integration as a unique knowledge source for technology development and the role of funding allocation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    21. Beck, Susanne & Brasseur, Tiare-Maria & Poetz, Marion & Sauermann, Henry, 2022. "Crowdsourcing research questions in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(4).
    22. Fontana, Magda & Iori, Martina & Montobbio, Fabio & Sinatra, Roberta, 2020. "New and atypical combinations: An assessment of novelty and interdisciplinarity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    23. Richard T. Carson & Joshua Graff Zivin & Jordan J. Louviere & Sally Sadoff & Jeffrey G. Shrader, 2022. "The Risk of Caution: Evidence from an Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(12), pages 9042-9060, December.
    24. Feng Shi & James Evans, 2023. "Surprising combinations of research contents and contexts are related to impact and emerge with scientific outsiders from distant disciplines," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-13, December.
    25. Danielle Li, 2017. "Expertise versus Bias in Evaluation: Evidence from the NIH," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 60-92, April.
    26. Chai, Sen & Menon, Anoop, 2019. "Breakthrough recognition: Bias against novelty and competition for attention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 733-747.
    27. Julian Kolev & Yuly Fuentes-Medel & Fiona Murray, 2019. "Is Blinded Review Enough? How Gendered Outcomes Arise Even Under Anonymous Evaluation," NBER Working Papers 25759, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    28. Jürgen Janger & Nicole Schmidt & Anna Strauss, 2019. "International Differences in Basic Research Grant Funding. A Systematic Comparison," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 61664.
    29. Andries, Petra & Clarysse, Bart & Costa, Sergio, 2021. "Technology ventures' engagement of external actors in the search for viable market applications: On the relevance of Technology Broadcasting and Systematic Validation," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 36(6).
    30. Mikko Packalen & Jay Bhattacharya, 2015. "Neophilia Ranking of Scientific Journals," NBER Working Papers 21579, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    31. Wachs, Johannes & Vedres, Balázs, 2021. "Does crowdfunding really foster innovation? Evidence from the board game industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    32. KWON Seokbeom & MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki & IKEUCHI Kenta, 2021. "Chasing Two Hares at Once? Effect of Joint Institutional Change for Promoting Commercial Use of University Knowledge and Scientific Research," Discussion papers 21026, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    33. Banal-Estañol, Albert & Macho-Stadler, Inés & Pérez-Castrillo, David, 2019. "Evaluation in research funding agencies: Are structurally diverse teams biased against?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1823-1840.
    34. Karol Flores-Szwagrzak & Rafael Treibich, 2020. "Teamwork and Individual Productivity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(6), pages 2523-2544, June.
    35. Chiara Franzoni & Paula Stephan & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2022. "Funding Risky Research," Entrepreneurship and Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(1), pages 103-133.
    36. Hani Safadi & Steven L. Johnson & Samer Faraj, 2021. "Who Contributes Knowledge? Core-Periphery Tension in Online Innovation Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 752-775, May.
    37. Hou, Jianhua & Wang, Dongyi & Li, Jing, 2022. "A new method for measuring the originality of academic articles based on knowledge units in semantic networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3).
    38. Ivo Blohm & Christoph Riedl & Johann Füller & Jan Marco Leimeister, 2016. "Rate or Trade? Identifying Winning Ideas in Open Idea Sourcing," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 27-48, March.
    39. Miguel Navascués & Costantino Budroni, 2019. "Theoretical research without projects," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-35, March.
    40. Pierre Azoulay & Erica Fuchs & Anna P. Goldstein & Michael Kearney, 2018. "Funding Breakthrough Research: Promises and Challenges of the "ARPA Model"," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 19, pages 69-96, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    41. Karolin Sjöö & Wolfgang Kaltenbrunner, 2023. "Gender mainstreaming research funding: a study of effects on STEM research proposals," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(2), pages 304-317.
    42. Stephen Gallo & Lisa Thompson & Karen Schmaling & Scott Glisson, 2018. "Risk evaluation in peer review of grant applications," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 216-229, June.
    43. Marco Ottaviani, 2020. "Grantmaking," Working Papers 672, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    44. Albert Banal-Estañol & Inés Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2016. "Key success drivers in public research grants: Funding the seeds of radical innovation in academia?," Economics Working Papers 1518, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    45. Hong Luo & Jeffrey Macher & Michael Wahlen, 2021. "Judgment Aggregation in Creative Production: Evidence from the Movie Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(10), pages 6358-6377, October.
    46. Albert Bravo-Biosca, 2019. "Experimental Innovation Policy," NBER Working Papers 26273, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    47. Christian Catalini & Christian Fons-Rosen & Patrick Gaulé, 2020. "How Do Travel Costs Shape Collaboration?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(8), pages 3340-3360, August.
    48. Erin L. Scott & Pian Shu & Roman M. Lubynsky, 2020. "Entrepreneurial Uncertainty and Expert Evaluation: An Empirical Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(3), pages 1278-1299, March.
    49. Hasan, Sharique & Koning, Rembrand, 2019. "Conversations and idea generation: Evidence from a field experiment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    50. Rodríguez Sánchez, Isabel & Makkonen, Teemu & Williams, Allan M., 2019. "Peer review assessment of originality in tourism journals: critical perspective of key gatekeepers," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 1-11.
    51. Jacqueline N. Lane & Misha Teplitskiy & Gary Gray & Hardeep Ranu & Michael Menietti & Eva C. Guinan & Karim R. Lakhani, 2022. "Conservatism Gets Funded? A Field Experiment on the Role of Negative Information in Novel Project Evaluation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(6), pages 4478-4495, June.
    52. Blandinieres, Florence & Pellens, Maikel, 2021. "Scientist's industry engagement and the research agenda: Evidence from Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-001, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    53. Pierre Azoulay & Danielle Li, 2020. "Scientific Grant Funding," NBER Working Papers 26889, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    54. Michaël Bikard, 2018. "Made in Academia: The Effect of Institutional Origin on Inventors’ Attention to Science," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(5), pages 818-836, October.
    55. Denise Falchetti & Gino Cattani & Simone Ferriani, 2022. "Start with “Why,” but only if you have to: The strategic framing of novel ideas across different audiences," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(1), pages 130-159, January.
    56. Frank Nagle & Florenta Teodoridis, 2020. "Jack of all trades and master of knowledge: The role of diversification in new distant knowledge integration," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(1), pages 55-85, January.
    57. Teplitskiy, Misha & Acuna, Daniel & Elamrani-Raoult, Aïda & Körding, Konrad & Evans, James, 2018. "The sociology of scientific validity: How professional networks shape judgement in peer review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1825-1841.
    58. Michaël Bikard, 2020. "Idea twins: Simultaneous discoveries as a research tool," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(8), pages 1528-1543, August.
    59. Ke, Qing, 2020. "Technological impact of biomedical research: The role of basicness and novelty," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    60. Sam Arts & Nicola Melluso & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2023. "Beyond Citations: Measuring Novel Scientific Ideas and their Impact in Publication Text," Papers 2309.16437, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2023.
    61. Aurélie Hemonnet-Goujot & Delphine Manceau & Celine Abecassis-Moedas, 2019. "Drivers and Pathways of NPD Success in the Marketing-External Design Relationship," Post-Print hal-01883760, HAL.
    62. Nicolas Carayol & Emeric Henry & Marianne Lanoë, 2020. "Stimulating Peer Effects? Evidence from a Research Cluster Policy," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03874261, HAL.
    63. Richard Carson & Joshua S. Graff Zivin & Jordan Louviere & Sally Sadoff & Jeffrey G. Shrader Jr, 2020. "The Risk of Caution: Evidence from an R&D Experiment," NBER Working Papers 26847, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    64. Jay Bhattacharya & Mikko Packalen, 2020. "Stagnation and Scientific Incentives," NBER Working Papers 26752, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    65. John-Paul Ferguson & Gianluca Carnabuci, 2017. "Risky Recombinations: Institutional Gatekeeping in the Innovation Process," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 133-151, February.
    66. Oliver Alexy, 2022. "How flat can it get? From better at flatter to the promise of the decentralized, boundaryless organization," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(1), pages 31-36, March.
    67. Lynn Wu & Lorin Hitt & Bowen Lou, 2020. "Data Analytics, Innovation, and Firm Productivity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(5), pages 2017-2039, May.
    68. Chengwei Liu, 2021. "In luck we trust: Capturing the diversity bonus through random selection," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 10(2), pages 85-91, June.
    69. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Wang, Jian, 2019. "Scientific novelty and technological impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1362-1372.
    70. Seolmin Yang & So Young Kim, 2023. "Knowledge-integrated research is more disruptive when supported by homogeneous funding sources: a case of US federally funded research in biomedical and life sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3257-3282, June.
    71. Albert Banal-Estañol & Inés Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2019. "Funding Academic Research: Grant Application, Partnership, Award, and Output," Working Papers 1093, Barcelona School of Economics.
    72. Pierre Azoulay & Danielle Li, 2020. "Scientific Grant Funding," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation and Public Policy, pages 117-150, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    73. Yian Yin & Yuxiao Dong & Kuansan Wang & Dashun Wang & Benjamin F. Jones, 2022. "Public use and public funding of science," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(10), pages 1344-1350, October.
    74. Kyle Myers, 2020. "The Elasticity of Science," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 103-134, October.
    75. Zhentao Liang & Jin Mao & Gang Li, 2023. "Bias against scientific novelty: A prepublication perspective," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 74(1), pages 99-114, January.
    76. Elhorst, Paul & Faems, Dries, 2021. "Evaluating proposals in innovation contests: Exploring negative scoring spillovers in the absence of a strict evaluation sequence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    77. Marco Seeber & Jef Vlegels & Mattia Cattaneo, 2022. "Conditions that do or do not disadvantage interdisciplinary research proposals in project evaluation," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(8), pages 1106-1126, August.
    78. Yann Bramoullé & Lorenzo Ductor, 2018. "Title length," Post-Print hal-01834038, HAL.
    79. Keyvan Vakili & Sarah Kaplan, 2021. "Organizing for innovation: A contingency view on innovative team configuration," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(6), pages 1159-1183, June.
    80. Linus Dahlander & Henning Piezunka, 2020. "Why crowdsourcing fails," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 9(1), pages 1-9, December.
    81. Loet Leydesdorff & Jordan A. Comins & Aaron A. Sorensen & Lutz Bornmann & Iina Hellsten, 2016. "Cited references and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) as two different knowledge representations: clustering and mappings at the paper level," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 2077-2091, December.
    82. Matthew P. Mount & Markus Baer & Matthew J. Lupoli, 2021. "Quantum leaps or baby steps? Expertise distance, construal level, and the propensity to invest in novel technological ideas," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(8), pages 1490-1515, August.
    83. Zhu, Kejia & Malhotra, Shavin & Li, Yaohan, 2022. "Technological diversity of patent applications and decision pendency," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    84. Mignon Wuestman & Koen Frenken & Iris Wanzenböck, 2020. "A genealogical approach to academic success," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(12), pages 1-16, December.
    85. Kevin J. Boudreau & Karim R. Lakhani, 2015. "Innovation Experiments: Researching Technical Advance, Knowledge Production, and the Design of Supporting Institutions," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 16, pages 135-167, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    86. Stefano Bianchini & Patrick Llerena & Sıla Öcalan-Özel & Emre Özel, 2022. "Gender diversity of research consortia contributes to funding decisions in a multi-stage grant peer-review process," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, December.
    87. Hannes W. Lampe & Jan Reerink, 2021. "Know your audience: how language complexity affects impact in entrepreneurship science," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 91(7), pages 1025-1061, September.
    88. Bornmann, Lutz & Tekles, Alexander & Zhang, Helena H. & Ye, Fred Y., 2019. "Do we measure novelty when we analyze unusual combinations of cited references? A validation study of bibliometric novelty indicators based on F1000Prime data," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(4).
    89. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Nicola Melluso & Francesco Alessandro Massucci, 2022. "Exploring the antecedents of interdisciplinarity at the European Research Council: a topic modeling approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 6961-6991, December.
    90. Zhang, Xinyuan & Xie, Qing & Song, Min, 2021. "Measuring the impact of novelty, bibliometric, and academic-network factors on citation count using a neural network," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2).
    91. Ellgen, Clifford & Kang, Dominique, 2021. "Research equity: Incentivizing high-risk basic research with market mechanisms," SocArXiv cvngq, Center for Open Science.
    92. Eva Barlösius & Kristina Blem, 2021. "Evidence of research mastery: How applicants argue the feasibility of their research projects [Concepts of originality in the natural science, medical, and engineering disciplines: An analysis of r," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 563-571.
    93. Byeongwoo Kang & Kazuyuki Motohashi, 2020. "Academic contribution to industrial innovation by funding type," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 169-193, July.
    94. 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.
    95. Lu Liu & Benjamin F. Jones & Brian Uzzi & Dashun Wang, 2023. "Data, measurement and empirical methods in the science of science," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(7), pages 1046-1058, July.
    96. Rons, Nadine, 2018. "Bibliometric approximation of a scientific specialty by combining key sources, title words, authors and references," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 113-132.
    97. Axel Philipps, 2022. "Research funding randomly allocated? A survey of scientists’ views on peer review and lottery," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(3), pages 365-377.
    98. Yinyu Jin & Sha Yuan & Zhou Shao & Wendy Hall & Jie Tang, 2021. "Turing Award elites revisited: patterns of productivity, collaboration, authorship and impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(3), pages 2329-2348, March.

  8. Ivo Blohm & Christoph Riedl & Johann Füller & Jan Marco Leimeister, 2016. "Rate or Trade? Identifying Winning Ideas in Open Idea Sourcing," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 27-48, March.

    Cited by:

    1. Lele Cao & Vilhelm von Ehrenheim & Sebastian Krakowski & Xiaoxue Li & Alexandra Lutz, 2022. "Using Deep Learning to Find the Next Unicorn: A Practical Synthesis," Papers 2210.14195, arXiv.org.
    2. Samer Faraj & Georg von Krogh & Eric Monteiro & Karim R. Lakhani, 2016. "Special Section Introduction—Online Community as Space for Knowledge Flows," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 668-684, December.
    3. Thomas Görzen & Dennis Kundisch, 2019. "When in Doubt Follow the Crowd: How Idea Quality Moderates the Effect of an Anchor on Idea Evaluation," Working Papers Dissertations 57, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    4. Ho Cheung Brian Lee & Sulin Ba & Xinxin Li & Jan Stallaert, 2018. "Salience Bias in Crowdsourcing Contests," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 401-418, June.
    5. Weiquan Wang & Jingjun (David) Xu & May Wang, 2018. "Effects of Recommendation Neutrality and Sponsorship Disclosure on Trust vs. Distrust in Online Recommendation Agents: Moderating Role of Explanations for Organic Recommendations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(11), pages 5198-5219, November.
    6. Julia Troll & Ivo Blohm & Jan Marco Leimeister, 2019. "Why Incorporating a Platform-Intermediary can Increase Crowdsourcees’ Engagement," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 61(4), pages 433-450, August.
    7. Dominik Dellermann & Nikolaus Lipusch & Philipp Ebel & Jan Marco Leimeister, 2019. "Design principles for a hybrid intelligence decision support system for business model validation," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 29(3), pages 423-441, September.
    8. Tat Koon Koh & Muller Y. M. Cheung, 2022. "Seeker Exemplars and Quantitative Ideation Outcomes in Crowdsourcing Contests," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 265-284, March.
    9. Ho Cheung Brian Lee & Jan Stallaert & Ming Fan, 2020. "Anomalies in Probability Estimates for Event Forecasting on Prediction Markets," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(9), pages 2077-2095, September.
    10. Christoph Riedl & Victor P. Seidel, 2018. "Learning from Mixed Signals in Online Innovation Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1010-1032, December.

Chapters

  1. Markus Böhm & Stefanie Leimeister & Christoph Riedl & Helmut Krcmar, 2011. "Cloud Computing – Outsourcing 2.0 or a new Business Model for IT Provisioning?," Springer Books, in: Frank Keuper & Christian Oecking & Andreas Degenhardt (ed.), Application Management, pages 31-56, Springer.

    Cited by:

    1. Hsu, Pei-Fang & Ray, Soumya & Li-Hsieh, Yu-Yu, 2014. "Examining cloud computing adoption intention, pricing mechanism, and deployment model," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 474-488.

More information

Research fields, statistics, top rankings, if available.

Statistics

Access and download statistics for all items

Co-authorship network on CollEc

NEP Fields

NEP is an announcement service for new working papers, with a weekly report in each of many fields. This author has had 3 papers announced in NEP. These are the fields, ordered by number of announcements, along with their dates. If the author is listed in the directory of specialists for this field, a link is also provided.
  1. NEP-GTH: Game Theory (2) 2021-04-26 2022-12-05
  2. NEP-NET: Network Economics (2) 2021-04-26 2022-12-05
  3. NEP-CDM: Collective Decision-Making (1) 2021-04-26
  4. NEP-EXP: Experimental Economics (1) 2012-04-23

Corrections

All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. For general information on how to correct material on RePEc, see these instructions.

To update listings or check citations waiting for approval, Christoph Riedl should log into the RePEc Author Service.

To make corrections to the bibliographic information of a particular item, find the technical contact on the abstract page of that item. There, details are also given on how to add or correct references and citations.

To link different versions of the same work, where versions have a different title, use this form. Note that if the versions have a very similar title and are in the author's profile, the links will usually be created automatically.

Please note that most corrections can 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.