Science Studies Colloquium

The Science Studies Colloquium is a series of monthly meetings where scholars interested in scientometrics, science of science, sociology of science and related areas present their work to each other in a virtual setting. Each colloquium is one hour, with approximately 30 minutes presentation and 30 minutes discussion. If you are interested in joining the colloquium as audience, you can use this link:

If you are a scholar and would like to present your work, send an e-mail with the suggested topic and a brief outline of the contents to Jens Peter Andersen Jens Peter Andersen <>

Past presentations can be found below the current schedule, or on our YouTube channel (link opens in another window).

Use Zoom link:


Would you like to receive a monthly reminder about the colloquium? Please sign up for our newsletter. We will only send a monthly reminder, approximately a week before the next meeting, or if there are changes to the programme.

Easy time conversion and calendar events

Click the links containing the time and date of a presentation, and you will be directed to, where you can easily see the event time in your local time zone and import it to your calendar.


Photo of Thomas Klebel and Tony Ross-HellauerPhoto of Thomas Klebel and Tony Ross-Hellauer
Thomas Klebel and Tony Ross-Hellauer

Article Processing Charges and the Stratification of Open Access Publishing

Wednesday, October 05 2022, 15:00 CEST (+0200)
The Open Access movement promised to increase knowledge sharing within and beyond academia, sidestepping issues of structural inequality. In spite of this initial hope, emerging evidence shows that the model of author facing charges is erecting a new barrier, threatening equity in who can contribute to the scientific record. This talk will investigate the role of institutional resources in shaping publication outcomes across fields and countries, and discuss the wider implications of current threats to an equitable implementation of Open Research.

Photo of Roberta Sinatra
Roberta Sinatra

Title to be announced

Wednesday, November 02 2022, 16:00 CET (+0100)

Photo of Barbara Lancho Barrantes
Barbara Lancho Barrantes

Predatory publishing threatens research integrity: bibliometrics as key actor in the detection

Wednesday, December 07 2022, 15:00 CET (+0100)

Past presentations

Photo of Marion Maisonobe
Marion Maisonobe

Geography of scientific research and knowledge networks

Wednesday, September 14 2022, 15:00 CEST (+0200)
Recorded presentation

Photo of Jennifer Byrne
Jennifer Byrne

Paper mills and the preclinical research ecosystem

Wednesday, July 06 2022, 14:00 CEST (+0200)
Recorded presentation

Photo of Marc J. Lerchenmüller
Marc J. Lerchenmüller

The Effect of Mentor Gender on the Evaluation of Protégés

Wednesday, June 08 2022, 15:00 CEST (+0200)
Recorded presentation

The scientific community calls on senior women to help mentoring the next generation of scientists. Yet research indicates that particularly senior women often get undervalued in academia, from hitting glass ceilings to receiving less recognition for accomplishments than male peers. We examine whether these gender differences in evaluations of senior scientists, who are poised to serve as mentors, also affect the evaluation of protégés and their work. Identifying mentors of 4,556 scientists with competitive early career funding from the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH), we document a citation discount of 10% on the average paper published by women- relative to men-mentored protégés. Using data on both the publications of the mentored protégés as well as the citing articles, we distinguish supply-side (i.e., scientists’ offerings) from demand-side (i.e., actions by the scientific community) explanations. Supply-side factors appear to account for about 40% of the citation discount. The remainder is explained by men citing protégés of women less often than protégés of men. This gender-biased treatment on the demand-side particularly afflicts work in the most impactful research areas that draw the most citations. Although both men and women mentors spur protégés to producing their very best work, the science community gives women-mentored protégés less recognition for it. These findings raise concerns about an unbiased discourse on the best scientific contributions and about systemic limitations to women serving as mentors as a means to closing gender gaps in science.

Photo of Marek Kwiek
Marek Kwiek

Man-Woman Collaboration and Academic Careers: a Study of 25,000 University Professors

Wednesday, April 13 2022, 15:00 CEST (+0200)
Recorded presentation

We examined male-female collaboration practices of all internationally visible (25,000) Polish university professors based on their 160,000 Scopus-indexed publications. We merged a national registry of 100,000 scientists (with full administrative and biographical data) with the Scopus publication database. We examined the propensity to conduct same-sex collaboration across male-dominated, female-dominated, and gender-balanced disciplines. Across all age-groups and all academic positions, the majority of male scientists collaborate solely with men. The majority of female scientists, in contrast, do not collaborate with women at all. The gender homophily principle (i.e. collaborating predominantly with scientists of the same sex) works powerfully for male scientists – but does not seem to work for female scientists. We examined the propensity to engage in same-sex collaboration across several new dimensions. This research goes beyond traditional bibliometric studies of gender-based homophily in research collaboration by combining the data routinely inaccessible to large-scale studies (such as the biological age of all scientists, and the stages of their academic careers) and the data routinely accessible in bibliometric studies, such as journal prestige, academic disciplines, and institutional type. We discuss practical implications of our research for academic careers.

Photo of Guillaume Cabanac, Cyril Labbé, and Alexander MagazinovPhoto of Guillaume Cabanac, Cyril Labbé, and Alexander MagazinovPhoto of Guillaume Cabanac, Cyril Labbé, and Alexander Magazinov
Guillaume Cabanac, Cyril Labbé, and Alexander Magazinov

Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science. Evidence of critical issues affecting established journals

Wednesday, March 09 2022, 15:00 CET (+0100)
Recorded presentation

Photo of Stefanie Haustein
Stefanie Haustein

How can we reduce the misuse of metrics in academia?

Wednesday, February 09 2022, 15:00 CET (+0100)
Presentation slides | Recorded presentation

The quantification and oversimplification of academic success is harming scholarly communities in all disciplines. Scholarly metrics, such as the h-index or impact factor, are widely applied in academic tenure and funding decisions, but often inappropriately. This has created publication pressure, leading to a range of adverse effects and even scientific misconduct. To improve the understanding and appropriate use of scholarly metrics, the concept of metrics literacies has been proposed as an integrated set of competencies, dispositions, and knowledge that empower individuals to recognize, interpret, critically assess, and effectively and ethically use scholarly metrics. Attempts to address the lack of metrics literacies in the wider academic community, such as the Leiden Manifesto and The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) or books such as Becoming Metric-Wise: A Bibliometric Guide for Researchers and Measuring Research are published as textual documents. As scholars are already overwhelmed by too much to read, the question arises why not to provide more efficient and effective multimedia open educational resources (OERs) instead of text? The Metrics Literacies project aims to aims to educate researchers and research administrators by developing, testing and disseminating educational videos to reduce the misuse of metrics in academia.

Photo of Björn Hammarfelt
Björn Hammarfelt

Assessing academic careers: Metrics and trajectories in the evaluation of professorial candidates

Wednesday, January 12 2022, 15:00 CET (+0100)
Recorded presentation

Reputation and recognition gained through publications has been a crucial merit for career advancement in science since the birth of the research university in the late 18th century. The ability to publish research is instrumental both for gaining recognition within a specific field of research, and for the possibility of getting a permanent position in academia. Through a content analysis of assessment reports for professorial candidates in biomedicine, economics and history this presentation discusses how publication oeuvres are compared and evaluated. Specifically the analysis focus on how referees use bibliometric measures and other types of 'judgment devices' to assess and rank candidates. Moreover, specific attention is given to how evaluators mobilize the idea of 'career trajectories' to weave together disparate bits of evidence extracted from the bylines of researchers' CVs.

Photo of Diego Kozlowski
Diego Kozlowski

Intersectional inequalities in science

Monday, December 06 2021, 15:00 CET (+0100)
Recorded presentation

Photo of Anna Abalkina
Anna Abalkina

The proliferation of hijacked journals: detection and academic misconduct

Wednesday, November 10 2021, 15:00 CET (+0100)
Recorded presentation

The presentation will discuss two issues of hijacked journals. The first shows how cost-reduction strategies of hijacked journals expansion allow to detect these fraudulent publishers. The second issue is connected with the belief in the literature that naïve authors submit papers to hijacked journals. The presentation will demonstrate that there is a group of dishonest authors who are attracted by the fast publication with no peer review process that is offered by hijacked journals.

Photo of Vincent Larivière
Vincent Larivière

Are self-citations a normal feature of knowledge accumulation or a perversion of research evaluation?

Wednesday, October 13 2021, 15:00 CEST (+0200)
Recorded presentation