Beyond economic bargaining power? Work-related internal migration and subjective well-being in couples. Hofmann, E., Stawarz, N., Netz, N., & Rüger, H. (2026). Beyond economic bargaining power? Work-related internal migration and subjective well-being in couples. Social Forces. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soag153
Abstract
Bargaining theory posits that both partners’ utility shapes couples’ migration decisions. Yet, most empirical tests focus on individual incomes, thus overlooking non-economic factors in couples’ deliberations about spatial mobility. We argue that considering holistic indicators of utility, such as subjective well-being, can advance our understanding of couples’ decision-making. Using data from the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP, 1991–2021) and fixed effects panel regressions, we analyze changes in life satisfaction following work-related internal migration on both individual and dyadic levels. Moreover, we examine whether these changes depend on shifts in partners’ economic bargaining power.
|
Heterogenität von Studierenden: Lernstrategien und Lernschwierigkeiten im Fern- und Präsenzstudium. Ordemann, J., & Steinkühler, J. (2026). Heterogenität von Studierenden: Lernstrategien und Lernschwierigkeiten im Fern- und Präsenzstudium. In S. Schaper, J. Lange, & S. Hofhues (Hrsg.), (Fern-)Studierende - Lebenswelten und Übergänge (S. 1-11). Weinheim: Beltz.
|
Vom englischsprachige Hörsaal in den deutschen Arbeitsmarkt: Ergebnisse des ESDA-Projekts. Jaudzims, S., & Oberschelp, A. (2026). Vom englischsprachige Hörsaal in den deutschen Arbeitsmarkt: Ergebnisse des ESDA-Projekts. In N. Netz, M. Osterburg, J. Kercher, & I. Fuge (Hrsg.), Wissenschaft weltoffen 2026. Daten und Fakten zur Internationalisierung von Studium und Forschung in Deutschland und weltweit (S. 124-127). Bonn: wbv. https://doi.org/10.3278/7004002yw005
|
Temporäre Auslandsmobilität während der Promotion: Entwicklungen im Zuge der Corona-Pandemie. Muschik, M. L., Schiffer-Fiedler, I., & Schädlich, F. B. (2026). Temporäre Auslandsmobilität während der Promotion: Entwicklungen im Zuge der Corona-Pandemie. In N. Netz, N. Knüttgen, M. Osterburg, J. Kercher, & I. Fuge (Hrsg.), Wissenschaft weltoffen 2026. Daten und Fakten zur Internationalisierung von Studium und Forschung in
Deutschland und weltweit (S. 104-107). Bielefeld: wbv. https://doi.org/10.3278/7004002yw004
|
Internationale Promovierende im Fokus: Die Promovierendenstatistik als neue Datenquelle. Wegner, A. (2026). Internationale Promovierende im Fokus: Die Promovierendenstatistik als neue Datenquelle. In N. Netz, N. Knüttgen, M. Osterburg, J. Kercher, & I. Fuge (Hg.), Wissenschaft weltoffen 2026. Daten und Fakten zur Internationalisierung von Studium und Forschung in Deutschland und weltweit (S. 82–87). Bielefeld: wbv. https://doi.org/10.3278/7004002yw003
|
From Working Life to Retirement: Changing Educational Inequalities in Income Trajectories in Germany. Ordemann, J. (2026). From Working Life to Retirement: Changing Educational Inequalities in Income Trajectories in Germany. SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research (1243). Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW).
|
Fairness von Tenure-Track-Evaluationen: Eine interdisziplinäre Analyse formaler Rahmenbedingungen und individueller Wahrnehmung. Vogler, C., Begemann, C., Kizilirmak, J. M., & Röwert, J. (2026). Fairness von Tenure-Track-Evaluationen: Eine interdisziplinäre Analyse formaler Rahmenbedingungen und individueller Wahrnehmung. Beiträge zur Hochschulforschung, 2026 (2), 10-33. https://doi.org/10.58069/bzh.2026.2.178
|
Charting the benchmarking landscape – A survey of benchmarks for modern memory architectures. Broneske, D., Köhler, S., Karim, S., Jibril, M. A., Herzog, B., ... & Vögele, M. (2026). Charting the benchmarking landscape – A survey of benchmarks for modern memory architectures. BenchCouncil Transactions on Benchmarks, Standards and Evaluation. https://doi.org/10.66834/4gb7n382
|
Seeing like an evaluation system – How governance limits research assessment reforms. Vasen, F., Rafols, I., & Kulczycki, E. (28. September 2026). Seeing like an evaluation system – How governance limits research assessment reforms [Blogbeitrag]. Abgerufen von https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/09/28/seeing-like-an-evaluation-system-how-governance-limits-research-assessment-reforms
Abstract
The movement to promote responsible research assessment has gained ground in recent years. However, as Federico Vasen, Ismael Ràfols, and Emanuel Kulczycki discuss the transfer of these ideas from elite European systems to other contexts presents paradoxes and a range of governance challenges.
|
Disciplinary diversity, group size, and researcher rank as drivers of scientific performance: evidence from social science research groups in Colombia. Moreno-Hernandez, D. R., Kulczycki, E., & Cortés, J. D. (2026). Disciplinary diversity, group size, and researcher rank as drivers of scientific performance: evidence from social science research groups in Colombia. Research Evaluation, 2026(35), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvag057
Abstract
Social sciences (SS) research groups play a central role in advancing interdisciplinary knowledge. However, existing studies on the relationship between disciplinary diversity and scientific performance have predominantly focused on high-income countries and STEMM fields, leaving a gap in understanding these dynamics within SS research groups in middle- and low-income contexts. This study addresses this gap by examining the relationship between disciplinary diversity and scientific performance in SS research groups in Colombia. Drawing on national open-access data from the Colombian research groups national assessments (2013–2021), we analyze 3,640 group–year observations corresponding to 1,105 research groups.
|
Is there a ‘cancel culture’, and if so, for whom? Rank-based differences in restrictions on academic freedom. Hamann, J., Fabian, G., Thompson, C., & Villa, P. (2026). Is there a ‘cancel culture’, and if so, for whom? Rank-based differences in restrictions on academic freedom. The British Journal of Sociology.(Abgerufen am: 05.10.2026). https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.70171
|
Narratives of transparency: how do commercial and non-commercial providers of research information legitimize the datafication of research? Köchling, S., & Krüger, A. K. (2026). Narratives of transparency: how do commercial and non-commercial providers of research information legitimize the datafication of research? Information, Communication and Society, 2026, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2026.2733506
|
Innovation, openness, and publication strategies: A mixed-methods exploration of German inventors. Cruz Romero, R. (2026). Innovation, openness, and publication strategies: A mixed-methods exploration of German inventors. In Universiteit Antwerpen (Hrsg.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Science & Technology Indicators Conference (STI-ENID 2026) (Bd. 2026, S. 1348-1357). Antwerp, Belgium: ECOOM. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22656739
|
The double-edged sword of open data sources: the prevalence and implications of questionable journals in OpenAlex. Stephen, D., Faria, R., & Kulczycki, E. (2026). The double-edged sword of open data sources: the prevalence and implications of questionable journals in OpenAlex. In I. De Parade, E. Vandewalle, & T. Engels (Hrsg.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Science & Technology Indicators Conference (STI-ENID 2026) (Bd. 2026, S. 1307-1318). Antwerp: ECOOM. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22656726
|
Limited western circulation of Soviet scientometrics: the case of Naukometriya. Kwiecień, K., Kislenko, I., & Kulczycki, E. (2026). Limited western circulation of Soviet scientometrics: the case of Naukometriya. Scientometrics, 2026. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-026-05786-9
Abstract
Co-authored by Vasily Nalimov and Zinaida Mulchenko, Naukometriya (1969) introduced the term that came to name the field of scientometrics. However, the book itself had limited impact on the development of the field outside the Eastern Bloc. This paper examines how problems of translation shaped the global circulation of one of scientometrics’ foundational texts. We reconstruct the history of the book’s only English version, a 1971 machine translation produced with the Systran system for the U.S. Air Force, and assess its quality using the Multidimensional Quality Metrics framework.
|
