IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/wireae/v8y2019i6ne348.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stronger together—A framework for measuring interdisciplinary understanding

Author

Listed:
  • Samarth Kumar
  • Christoph Zöphel
  • Anna Martius
  • Rengin Cabadag
  • Frederik Plewnia
  • Nick Pruditsch
  • Bastian A. Sakowski
  • Dominik Möst

Abstract

Our society currently faces complex ecological, social, and economic challenges that require collaborative and interdisciplinary approaches. Although interest in interdisciplinary research is growing, it is still confronted with significant obstacles stemming from difficulties in establishing a common understanding. While others have evaluated interdisciplinary in a top‐down funding‐oriented ex ante manner or a result‐oriented ex post manner, this focus paper intends to create a framework that enables the measurement of interdisciplinary understanding within a group. Therefore, using the case of the interdisciplinary Boysen‐TU Dresden Research Group, a framework for measuring interdisciplinary understanding (MIU) is presented. The basis of the framework is the development of dimensions based on the specific composition and requirements of the interdisciplinary group. With this framework, two main contributions are provided. First, interdisciplinary understanding within a research group can be measured with respect to the defined dimensions. Through discussions on the differences of the understanding of projects over the dimensions, it is possible to establish a common understanding of projects. Second, the interdisciplinarity within a group or interdisciplinary distance between two specific research projects can be evaluated in order to identify possible difficulties in understanding, as well as recognizing potentials for interdisciplinary research. The MIU framework and the dimensions established in this paper can be adapted and transferred to any interdisciplinary research group to improve joint understanding of researchers and enable them to tackle complex techno‐societal problems of the future. This article is categorized under: Energy and Climate > Economics and Policy Energy Research & Innovation > Economics and Policy

Suggested Citation

  • Samarth Kumar & Christoph Zöphel & Anna Martius & Rengin Cabadag & Frederik Plewnia & Nick Pruditsch & Bastian A. Sakowski & Dominik Möst, 2019. "Stronger together—A framework for measuring interdisciplinary understanding," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(6), November.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:wireae:v:8:y:2019:i:6:n:e348
    DOI: 10.1002/wene.348
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/wene.348
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/wene.348?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hilde Tobi & Jarl K. Kampen, 2018. "Research design: the methodology for interdisciplinary research framework," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 1209-1225, May.
    2. Omodei, Elisa & De Domenico, Manlio & Arenas, Alex, 2017. "Evaluating the impact of interdisciplinary research: A multilayer network approach," Network Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 235-246, June.
    3. Wagner, Caroline S. & Roessner, J. David & Bobb, Kamau & Klein, Julie Thompson & Boyack, Kevin W. & Keyton, Joann & Rafols, Ismael & Börner, Katy, 2011. "Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): A review of the literature," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 14-26.
    4. Alan L Porter & J David Roessner & Alex S Cohen & Marty Perreault, 2006. "Interdisciplinary research: meaning, metrics and nurture," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(3), pages 187-195, December.
    5. Huutoniemi, Katri & Klein, Julie Thompson & Bruun, Henrik & Hukkinen, Janne, 2010. "Analyzing interdisciplinarity: Typology and indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 79-88, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rafols, Ismael & Leydesdorff, Loet & O’Hare, Alice & Nightingale, Paul & Stirling, Andy, 2012. "How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1282.
    2. Dellaportas, Steven & Xu, Lina & Yang, Zhiqiang, 2022. "The level of cross-disciplinarity in cross-disciplinary accounting research: analysis and suggestions for improvement," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    3. Solomon, Gregg E.A. & Youtie, Jan & Carley, Stephen & Porter, Alan L., 2019. "What people learn about how people learn: An analysis of citation behavior and the multidisciplinary flow of knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    4. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Flavia Costa, 2017. "Specialization versus diversification in research activities: the extent, intensity and relatedness of field diversification by individual scientists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1403-1418, September.
    5. Juste Raimbault, 2019. "Exploration of an interdisciplinary scientific landscape," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 617-641, May.
    6. Oviedo-García, M. Ángeles, 2016. "Tourism research quality: Reviewing and assessing interdisciplinarity," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 586-592.
    7. Alexis-Michel Mugabushaka & Anthi Kyriakou & Theo Papazoglou, 2016. "Bibliometric indicators of interdisciplinarity: the potential of the Leinster–Cobbold diversity indices to study disciplinary diversity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(2), pages 593-607, May.
    8. Carr, Gemma & Loucks, Daniel P. & Blöschl, Günter, 2018. "Gaining insight into interdisciplinary research and education programmes: A framework for evaluation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 35-48.
    9. Shahadat Uddin & Tasadduq Imam & Mohammad Mozumdar, 2021. "Research interdisciplinarity: STEM versus non-STEM," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 603-618, January.
    10. Stephen Carley & Alan L. Porter, 2012. "A forward diversity index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(2), pages 407-427, February.
    11. Jian Xu & Yi Bu & Ying Ding & Sinan Yang & Hongli Zhang & Chen Yu & Lin Sun, 2018. "Understanding the formation of interdisciplinary research from the perspective of keyword evolution: a case study on joint attention," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 973-995, November.
    12. Meijun Liu & Sijie Yang & Yi Bu & Ning Zhang, 2023. "Female early-career scientists have conducted less interdisciplinary research in the past six decades: evidence from doctoral theses," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-16, December.
    13. Ran Xu & Navid Ghaffarzadegan, 2018. "Neuroscience bridging scientific disciplines in health: Who builds the bridge, who pays for it?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 1183-1204, November.
    14. Jon Garner & Alan L. Porter & Nils C. Newman, 2014. "Distance and velocity measures: using citations to determine breadth and speed of research impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(3), pages 687-703, September.
    15. Wolfgang Glänzel & Koenraad Debackere, 2022. "Various aspects of interdisciplinarity in research and how to quantify and measure those," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(9), pages 5551-5569, September.
    16. Hamid R. Jamali & Ghasem Azadi-Ahmadabadi & Saeid Asadi, 2018. "Interdisciplinary relations of converging technologies: Nano–Bio–Info–Cogno (NBIC)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(2), pages 1055-1073, August.
    17. Jiang Wu & Miao Jin & Xiu-Hao Ding, 2015. "Diversity of individual research disciplines in scientific funding," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(2), pages 669-686, May.
    18. M. Manjula & R. Rengalakshmi, 2021. "Making Research Collaborations: Learning from Processes of Transdisciplinary Engagement in Agricultural Research," Review of Development and Change, , vol. 26(1), pages 25-39, June.
    19. Alfonso Ávila-Robinson & Cristian Mejia & Shintaro Sengoku, 2021. "Are bibliometric measures consistent with scientists’ perceptions? The case of interdisciplinarity in research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7477-7502, September.
    20. Mingers, John & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2015. "A review of theory and practice in scientometrics," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(1), pages 1-19.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:wireae:v:8:y:2019:i:6:n:e348. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=2041-8396 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.