oa Wetenschappelijk onderzoek en maatschappelijke verantwoordelijkheid¹

References

1. Arnold, R. D., & Wade, J. P.(2015). A definition of systems thinking: A systems approach. Procedia Computer Science, 44, 669-678.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Baron, N.(2010). Escape from the ivory tower: A guide to making your science matter. Washington: Island Press.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Benedictus, R., & Miedema, F.(2016). Redefine excellence: Fix incentives to fix science. Nature, 538, 453-455.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Benneworth, P., Jongbloed, B. W.(2010). Who matters to universities? A stakeholder perspective on humanities, arts and social sciences valorisation. Higher Education, 59(5), 567-588.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Bornman, L.(2013). What is societal impact of research and how can it be assessed? A literature survey. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 64(2), 217-233.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Boyer, E. L.(1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. New York: Jossey-Bass. [Special report, Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.]
   [Google Scholar]
7. Bremer, S.(2013). Mobilising high-quality knowledge through dialogic environmental governance: A comparison of approaches and their institutional settings. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 16(1/2), 66-90.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Cairney, P.(2016). The politics of evidence-based policy making. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Cairney, P., Oliver, K., & Wellstead, A.(2016). To bridge the divide between evidence and policy: Reduce ambiguity as much as uncertainty. Public Administration Review, 76(3), 399-402.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Chalmers, D.(2011). Progress and challenges to the recognition and reward of the scholarship of teaching in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(1), 25-38.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Cools, S.(2018). Professoren, kom uit die ivoren toren. De Standaard, 4 mei. https://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf20180503_03495797
    [Google Scholar]
12. Davies, H. T.O., Nutley, S. M., Smith, P. C. (Eds.). (2000). What works? Evidence-based policy and practice in public services. Bristol: Policy Press.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Donnelly, C. A., Boyd, I., Campbell, P., Craig, C., Vallance, P., Walport, M., Whitty, C. J. M., Woods, E. & Wormald, C.(2018). Four principles to make evidence synthesis more useful for policy. Nature, 558, 361-364.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Douglas, H.(2009). Science, policy and the value free ideal. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Ferguson, M. W. J.(2016). Do judge: Treat metrics only as surrogates. Nature, 538, 455.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Frey, B., & Osterloh, M.(2010). Motivate people with prizes. Nature, 465, 871-872.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Gluckman, P.(2014). The art of science advice to government. Nature, 507, 163-165.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Hart, A., Maxim, L., Siegrist, M., Von Goetz, N., Da Cruz, C., … & Hardy, A.(2019). Guidance on communication of uncertainty in scientific assessments. EFSA Journal, 17(1), 5520. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5520
    [Google Scholar]
19. Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L, De Rijcke, S., & Rafols, I.(2015). The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics.Nature, 520, 429-431.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Marcinkowski, F., Kohring, M., Fürst, S., & Friedrichsmeier, A.(2014). Organizational influence on scientists’ efforts to go public: An empirical investigation. Science Communication, 36(1), 56-80.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Marris, P.(1990). Witnesses, engineers or storytellers: Roles of sociologists in social policy. In H.J.Gans (Ed.), Sociology in America (pp. 75-87). London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Meyer, G., & Sandøe, P.(2012). Going public: Good scientific conduct. Science and Engineering Ethics, 18(2), 173-197.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Meyer, M.(2010). The rise of the knowledge broker. Science Communication, 32(1), 118-127.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Moher, D., Naudet, F., Cristea, I. A., Miedema, F., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Goodman, S. N.(2018). Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure. PLoS Biology, 16(3): e2004089. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2004089
    [Google Scholar]
25. OECD(2015). Scientific advice for policy making: The role and responsibility of expert bodies and individual scientists. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 21. Paris: OECD Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Olmos-Peñuela, J., Benneworth, P., Elena Castro-Martínez, E.(2015). Are sciences essential and humanities elective? Disentangling competing claims for humanities’ research public value. Arts & Humanities in Higher Education, 14(1), 61-78.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Parkhurst, J. O.(2016). Appeals to evidence for the resolution of wicked problems: the origins and mechanisms of evidentiary bias. Policy Sciences, 49(4), 373-393.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Pielke, R. A. Jr.(2007). The honest broker: Making sense of science in policy and politics. New YorkCambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Royal Society and the Academy of Medical Sciences(2018). Evidence synthesis for policy: A statement of principles. https://royalsociety.org/-/media/policy/projects/evidence-synthesis/evidence-synthesis-statement-principles.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
30. Tyler, C.(2017). Wanted: Academics wise to the needs of government. Nature, 552, 7.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Tweedie, R. L., Mengersen, K. L., & Eccleston, J. A.(1994). Garbage in, garbage out: Can statisticians quantify the effects of poor data?Chance, 7(2), 20-27.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Vermeulen, J.(2019). Community service learning en de ivoren toren. DUB, 9 mei. https://www.dub.uu.nl/nl/blog/community-service-learning-en-de-ivoren-toren
    [Google Scholar]
33. Weckowska, D. M.(2015). Learning in university technology transfer offices: Transactions-focused and relations-focused approaches to commercialization of academic research. Technovation, 41-42, 62-74.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Weingart, P.(1998). Science and the media. Research Policy, 27(8), 869-879.
    [Google Scholar]