Silje Marie Svartefoss
Biographic Data
| ID | 8970360 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Silje Marie Svartefoss |
| GIVEN NAMES | Silje Marie |
| FAMILY NAME | Svartefoss |
| SIGNATURE | SVARTEFOSS S M |
| AFFILIATIONS | Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education |
| ORCID | 0000-0001-5072-1293 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 2 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 0 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 2 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2024 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2026 |
| H-INDEX | 0 |
Double-blind peer review and unconventional research
In response to concerns that their research funding systems impose unwarranted epistemic restrictions on scientific research and discourage unconventional and risky projects, funders are exploring alternative funding instruments. This paper presents analyses of Spark, a pilot funding instrument of the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) for unconventional and high-risk research that introduced a double-blind evaluation process without review…
Explaining research performance
In this article, we study the motivation and performance of researchers. More specifically, we investigate what motivates researchers across different research fields and countries and how this motivation influences their research performance. The basis for our study is a large-N survey of economists, cardiologists, and physicists in Denmark, Norway, Sweden, the Netherlands, and the UK. The analysis shows that researchers are primarily motivated …
No prominent works on this page.
Explaining research performance
In this article, we study the motivation and performance of researchers. More specifically, we investigate what motivates researchers across different research fields and countries and how this motivation influences their research performance. The basis for our study is a large-N survey of economists, cardiologists, and physicists in Denmark, Norway, Sweden, the Netherlands, and the UK. The analysis shows that researchers are primarily motivated …
Double-blind peer review and unconventional research
In response to concerns that their research funding systems impose unwarranted epistemic restrictions on scientific research and discourage unconventional and risky projects, funders are exploring alternative funding instruments. This paper presents analyses of Spark, a pilot funding instrument of the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) for unconventional and high-risk research that introduced a double-blind evaluation process without review…
scientometrics and bibliometrics research (2 works) · Academic Publishing and Open Access (1 works) · Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies (1 works) · Human Resource Development and Performance Evaluation (1 works) · Motivation and Self-Concept in Sports (1 works) · Peer review (1 works) · Psychology (1 works)