Sven E. Hug
Cited by
Cited by
A multilevel meta-analysis of studies reporting correlations between the h index and 37 different h index variants
L Bornmann, R Mutz, SE Hug, HD Daniel
Journal of Informetrics 5 (3), 346-359, 2011
Visualizing the context of citations referencing papers published by Eugene Garfield: A new type of keyword co-occurrence analysis
L Bornmann, R Haunschild, SE Hug
Scientometrics 114, 427-437, 2018
The coverage of Microsoft Academic: Analyzing the publication output of a university
SE Hug, MP Brändle
Scientometrics 113, 1551-1571, 2017
Citation Analysis with Microsoft Academic
SE Hug, M Ochsner, MP Braendle
Scientometrics 111 (1), 371–378, 2017
Criteria for assessing research quality in the humanities: a Delphi study among scholars of English literature, German literature and art history
SE Hug, M Ochsner, HD Daniel
Research Evaluation 22 (5), 369–383, 2013
Four types of research in the humanities: Setting the stage for research quality criteria in the humanities
M Ochsner, SE Hug, HD Daniel
Research Evaluation 22 (2), 79-92, 2013
Research Assessment in the Humanities. Towards Criteria and Procedures.
M Ochsner, SE Hug, HD Daniel
Springer, 2016
The future of research assessment in the humanities: bottom-up assessment procedures
M Ochsner, S Hug, I Galleron
Palgrave communications 3 (1), 1-12, 2017
Indicators for research quality in the humanities: Opportunities and limitations
M Ochsner, SE Hug, HD Daniel
Bibliometrie-Praxis und Forschung 1, 2012
A framework to explore and develop criteria for assessing research quality in the humanities
SE Hug, M Ochsner, HD Daniel
International Journal for Education Law and Policy 10 (1), 1, 2014
Criteria for assessing grant applications: A systematic review
SE Hug, M Aeschbach
Palgrave Communications 6 (1), 1-15, 2020
Setting the stage for the assessment of research quality in the humanities. Consolidating the results of four empirical studies
M Ochsner, SE Hug, HD Daniel
Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaften 17 (6 Supplement), 111-132, 2014
Humanities scholars’ conceptions of research quality
M Ochsner, SE Hug, HD Daniel
Research assessment in the humanities: Towards criteria and procedures, 43-69, 2016
The number of linked references of publications in Microsoft Academic in comparison with the Web of Science
R Haunschild, SE Hug, MP Brändle, L Bornmann
Scientometrics 114, 367-370, 2018
Towards theorizing peer review
SE Hug
Quantitative Science Studies 3 (3), 815-831, 2022
Do peers share the same criteria for assessing grant applications?
SE Hug, M Ochsner
Research Evaluation 31 (1), 104-117, 2022
Entwicklung von Qualitätskriterien für die Forschung in den Geisteswissenschaften–Eine Explorationsstudie in den Literaturwissenschaften und der Kunstgeschichte
SE Hug, M Ochsner, HD Daniel
Qualität in der Wissenschaft 5 (4), 91-97, 2010
Bibliometrics-based heuristics: What is their definition and how can they be studied? Â-Research note
L Bornmann, S Hug
Profesional de la Información 29 (4), 2020
The concordance of field-normalized scores based on Web of Science and Microsoft Academic data: A case study in computer sciences
T Scheidsteger, R Haunschild, S Hug, L Bornmann
arXiv preprint arXiv:1802.10141, 2018
Research assessment in the humanities: Introduction
M Ochsner, SE Hug, HD Daniel
Research assessment in the humanities: towards criteria and procedures, 1-10, 2016
The system can't perform the operation now. Try again later.
Articles 1–20