IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v2y2016i1d10.1057_palcomms.2016.55.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating interdisciplinary research: the elephant in the peer-reviewers’ room

Author

Listed:
  • Tom McLeish

    (Durham University, Durham, UK)

  • Veronica Strang

    (Durham University, Durham, UK)

Abstract

We review a selection of published reports on the evaluation and wider peer-review of interdisciplinary research (IDR), drawing on an in-depth examination of a range of interdisciplinary projects and the work of a UK-based working group of funders and researchers. Our aim is to elucidate best practice. We focus the study on integrative, interdisciplinary projects, rather than those at the level of “multidisciplinary dialogue”. Five areas of evaluation (publishing, research grants, careers, IDR centres, institutions) demonstrate both commonality and difference in the task of measuring added value in IDR collaborations. We find that, although single-discipline peer review processes are poorly suited to address IDR, a framework that starts with the assumption that IDR is a fundamental academic research practice is effective for single-discipline evaluation as well. This article is published as part of a collection on interdisciplinarity.

Suggested Citation

  • Tom McLeish & Veronica Strang, 2016. "Evaluating interdisciplinary research: the elephant in the peer-reviewers’ room," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 2(1), pages 1-8, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:2:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1057_palcomms.2016.55
    DOI: 10.1057/palcomms.2016.55
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/palcomms.2016.55
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/palcomms.2016.55?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gabriele Bammer & Michael O’Rourke & Deborah O’Connell & Linda Neuhauser & Gerald Midgley & Julie Thompson Klein & Nicola J. Grigg & Howard Gadlin & Ian R. Elsum & Marcel Bursztyn & Elizabeth A. Fulto, 2020. "Expertise in research integration and implementation for tackling complex problems: when is it needed, where can it be found and how can it be strengthened?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Casey Helgeson & Robert E. Nicholas & Klaus Keller & Chris E. Forest & Nancy Tuana, 2022. "Attention to values helps shape convergence research," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 170(1), pages 1-19, January.
    3. Bethany K Laursen & Nicole Motzer & Kelly J Anderson, 2022. "Pathways for assessing interdisciplinarity: A systematic review," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(3), pages 326-343.
    4. Melo, Ana Teixeira & Caves, Leo Simon Dominic, 2018. "Complex systems of knowledge integration: A pragmatic proposal for coordinating and enhancing inter/transdisciplinarity," OSF Preprints 7v49b, Center for Open Science.
    5. Shahadat Uddin & Tasadduq Imam & Mohammad Mozumdar, 2021. "Research interdisciplinarity: STEM versus non-STEM," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 603-618, January.
    6. Lin Zhang & Ziyi Tu & Yifei Yu & Yuanyuan Shang & Ying Huang, 2024. "Spotting potential reviewers for interdisciplinary research: insights on active reviewers from Publons," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(9), pages 5533-5556, September.

    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:pal:palcom:v:2:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1057_palcomms.2016.55. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    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.