@article{OberauerKliegl2006,
  author    = {Oberauer, Klaus and Kliegl, Reinhold},
  title     = {A formal model of capacity limits in working memory},
  series = {Journal of Memory and Language},
  volume    = {55},
  journal   = {Journal of Memory and Language},
  number    = {4},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Amsterdam},
  issn      = {0749-596X},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.jml.2006.08.009},
  pages     = {601 -- 626},
  year      = {2006},
  abstract  = {A mathematical model of working-memory capacity limits is proposed on the key assumption of mutual interference between items in working memory. Interference is assumed to arise from overwriting of features shared by these items. The model was fit to time-accuracy data of memory-updating tasks from four experiments using nonlinear mixed effect (NLME) models as a framework. The model gave a good account of the data from a numerical and a spatial task version. The performance pattern in a combination of numerical and spatial updating could be explained by variations in the interference parameter: assuming less feature overlap between contents from different domains than between contents from the same domain, the model can account for double dissociations of content domains in dual-task experiments. Experiment 3 extended this idea to similarity within the verbal domain. The decline of memory accuracy with increasing memory load was steeper with phonologically similar than with dissimilar material, although processing speed was faster for the similar material. The model captured the similarity effects with a higher estimated interference parameter for the similar than for the dissimilar condition. The results are difficult to explain with alternative models, in particular models incorporating time-based decay and models assuming limited resource pools.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{ThielePruin2021,
  author    = {Thiele, Lukas and Pruin, Andree},
  title     = {Does large-scale digital collaboration contribute to crisis management?},
  series = {der moderne staat - Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Public Policy, Recht und Management},
  volume    = {14},
  journal   = {der moderne staat - Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Public Policy, Recht und Management},
  number    = {2-2021},
  publisher = {Verlag Barbara Budrich},
  address   = {Leverkusen-Opladen},
  issn      = {1865-7192},
  doi       = {10.3224/dms.v14i2.07},
  pages     = {334 -- 350},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {In recent years, collaborative approaches to crisis management involving citizens have gained increasing attention. One example is the \#WirVsVirus hackathon, which was conducted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and had over 28,000 participants. Because research on large-scale, digital collaboration in crisis situations is scarce, consequences of their use in crisis management remain unclear. This article relies on the open governance paradigm as a lens for studying two projects emerging from the hackathon. Based on nine qualitative expert interviews, we ask how digital open governance affects governance capacity and legitimacy in crisis management. Our findings suggest that digital open governance can contribute to governance capacity and legitimacy, as it mobilises large, diverse groups of citizens to quickly develop citizen-centric, ready-to-use solutions for crisisrelated problems. However, we also identified potential problems, including risks regarding legitimacy and accountability, difficulties with scalable solutions, and questionable long-term impacts.},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{FischerSiegelProelleretal.2022,
  author    = {Fischer, Caroline and Siegel, John and Proeller, Isabella and Drathschmidt, Nicolas},
  title     = {Resilience through digitalisation},
  series = {Public management review},
  volume    = {25},
  journal   = {Public management review},
  number    = {4},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {1471-9037},
  doi       = {10.1080/14719037.2022.2037014},
  pages     = {808 -- 835},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {This article examines public service resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic and studies the switch to telework due to social distancing measures. We argue that the pandemic and related policies led to increasing demands on public organisations and their employees. Following the job demands-resources model, we argue that resilience only can arise in the presence of resources for buffering these demands. Survey data were collected from 1,189 German public employees, 380 participants were included for analysis. The results suggest that the public service was resilient against the crisis and that the shift to telework was not as demanding as expected.},
  language  = {en}
}