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/
Twitter: @criedl

Affiliation

(50%) Department of Economics
Northeastern University

Boston, Massachusetts (United States)
https://www.northeastern.edu/cssh/economics/

: (617)373-2882
(617)373-3640
301 Lake hall, 360 Huntington Avenue, Boston MA 02115
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/

:

360 Huntington Ave, Boston, MA 02115
RePEc:edi:cbneuus (more details at EDIRC)

Research output

as
Jump to: Working papers Articles

Working papers

  1. 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. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.

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. 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. 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. Nicolas Carayol, 2018. "The Right Job and the Job Right: Novelty, Impact and Journal Stratification in Science," Post-Print hal-02274559, HAL.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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).
    7. 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.
    8. Chai, Sen & Menon, Anoop, 2019. "Breakthrough recognition: Bias against novelty and competition for attention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 733-747.
    9. 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.
    10. Mikko Packalen & Jay Bhattacharya, 2015. "Neophilia Ranking of Scientific Journals," NBER Working Papers 21579, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. Albert Bravo-Biosca, 2019. "Experimental Innovation Policy," NBER Working Papers 26273, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Hasan, Sharique & Koning, Rembrand, 2019. "Conversations and idea generation: Evidence from a field experiment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Wang, Jian, 2019. "Scientific novelty and technological impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1362-1372.
    18. Albert Banal-Estañol & Inés Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2019. "Funding Academic Research: Grant Application, Partnership, Award, and Output," Working Papers 1093, Barcelona Graduate School of Economics.
    19. Yann Bramoullé & Lorenzo Ductor, 2018. "Title length," Post-Print hal-01834038, HAL.
    20. 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.
    21. 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.

  2. 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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.

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 1 paper 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-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 hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.