IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v106y2016i1d10.1007_s11192-015-1784-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Orientations and outcome of interdisciplinary research: the case of research behaviour in translational medical science

Author

Listed:
  • Finn Valentin

    (Copenhagen Business School)

  • Maria Theresa Norn

    (The Think Tank DEA)

  • Lars Alkaersig

    (Technical University of Denmark)

Abstract

The importance of interdisciplinary research in accelerating the progress and commercialization of science is widely recognized, yet little is known about how academic research self-organizes towards interdisciplinarity. In this paper, we therefore explore the micro-level behavior of researchers as they venture into a promising space for interdisciplinary research, namely translational research—a bridge between basic and applied biomedical research. More specifically, we ask (1) whether the researchers who choose to engage in translational research have a strong scientific record, (2) how interdisciplinary research spanning basic and applied research influences the output of academic research, and (3) how different disciplinary distance in interdisciplinary research contributes to reputational benefits of researchers. We find that for some types of collaboration, interdisciplinarity results in more highly cited research, while in others it is not, and look for explanations for this difference. Our results show that translational research draws higher citations when it involves university researchers from the most basic end of the disciplinary spectrum, and when its issues are directed at basic (rather than applied) research.

Suggested Citation

  • Finn Valentin & Maria Theresa Norn & Lars Alkaersig, 2016. "Orientations and outcome of interdisciplinary research: the case of research behaviour in translational medical science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(1), pages 67-90, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:106:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-015-1784-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-015-1784-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-015-1784-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-015-1784-2?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lori Rosenkopf & Paul Almeida, 2003. "Overcoming Local Search Through Alliances and Mobility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(6), pages 751-766, June.
    2. Audretsch, David B. & Bozeman, Barry & Combs, Kathryn L. & Feldman, Maryann & Link, Albert N. & Siegel, Donald S. & Stephan, Paula, 2002. "The Economics of Science and Technology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 155-203, April.
    3. Patrick Llerena & Frieder Meyer-Krahmer, 2003. "Interdisciplinary Research and the Organization of the University: General Challenges and a Case Study," Chapters, in: Aldo Geuna & Ammon J. Salter & W. Edward Steinmueller (ed.), Science and Innovation, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Nooteboom, Bart & Van Haverbeke, Wim & Duysters, Geert & Gilsing, Victor & van den Oord, Ad, 2007. "Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 1016-1034, September.
    5. Stefano Brusoni & Paola Criscuolo & Aldo Geuna, 2005. "The knowledge bases of the world's largest pharmaceutical groups: what do patent citations to non-patent literature reveal?," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 395-415.
    6. John Hagedoorn, 1993. "Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Interorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(5), pages 371-385, July.
    7. Aldo Geuna & Ammon J. Salter & W. Edward Steinmueller (ed.), 2003. "Science and Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2831.
    8. Corley, Elizabeth A. & Boardman, P. Craig & Bozeman, Barry, 2006. "Design and the management of multi-institutional research collaborations: Theoretical implications from two case studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 975-993, September.
    9. Tijssen, Robert J. W., 1992. "A quantitative assessment of interdisciplinary structures in science and technology: Co-classification analysis of energy research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 27-44, February.
    10. Loet Leydesdorff & Ismael Rafols, 2009. "A global map of science based on the ISI subject categories," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(2), pages 348-362, February.
    11. Alan L. Porter & Ismael Rafols, 2009. "Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(3), pages 719-745, December.
    12. Michael Gowanlock & Rich Gazan, 2013. "Assessing researcher interdisciplinarity: a case study of the University of Hawaii NASA Astrobiology Institute," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 133-161, January.
    13. Marie Thursby & Richard Jensen, 2001. "Proofs and Prototypes for Sale: The Licensing of University Inventions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 240-259, March.
    14. Thed van Leeuwen & Robert Tijssen, 2000. "Interdisciplinary dynamics of modern science: analysis of cross-disciplinary citation flows," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(3), pages 183-187, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Gauffriau, Marianne, 2017. "A categorization of arguments for counting methods for publication and citation indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 672-684.
    2. Slobodan Perović & Sandro Radovanović & Vlasta Sikimić & Andrea Berber, 2016. "Optimal research team composition: data envelopment analysis of Fermilab experiments," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(1), pages 83-111, July.
    3. Zhichao Ba & Yujie Cao & Jin Mao & Gang Li, 2019. "A hierarchical approach to analyzing knowledge integration between two fields—a case study on medical informatics and computer science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(3), pages 1455-1486, June.
    4. J. M. Santos & H. Horta & H. Luna, 2022. "The relationship between academics’ strategic research agendas and their preferences for basic research, applied research, or experimental development," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(7), pages 4191-4225, July.
    5. Jinqing Yang & Zhifeng Liu & Yong Huang, 2024. "From informal to formal: scientific knowledge role transition prediction," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(8), pages 4909-4935, August.

    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. Su, Hsin-Ning & Moaniba, Igam M., 2017. "Investigating the dynamics of interdisciplinary evolution in technology developments," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 12-23.
    2. Seongkyoon Jeong & Jong-Chan Kim & Jae Young Choi, 2015. "Technology convergence: What developmental stage are we in?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 841-871, September.
    3. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo & Flavia Costa, 2012. "Identifying interdisciplinarity through the disciplinary classification of coauthors of scientific publications," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(11), pages 2206-2222, November.
    4. Rajneesh Narula & Andrea Martínez-Noya, 2014. "International R&D Alliances by Firms: Origins and Development," John H Dunning Centre for International Business Discussion Papers jhd-dp2014-06, Henley Business School, University of Reading.
    5. Hiroko Nakamura & Shinji Suzuki & Tomobe Hironori & Yuya Kajikawa & Ichiro Sakata, 2011. "Citation lag analysis in supply chain research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(2), pages 221-232, May.
    6. Villani, Elisa & Rasmussen, Einar & Grimaldi, Rosa, 2017. "How intermediary organizations facilitate university–industry technology transfer: A proximity approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 86-102.
    7. Hanne Peeters & Julie Callaert & Bart Looy, 2020. "Do firms profit from involving academics when developing technology?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 494-521, April.
    8. Lina Xu & Steven Dellaportas & Jin Wang, 2022. "A study of interdisciplinary accounting research: analysing the diversity of cited references," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(2), pages 2131-2162, June.
    9. Lyu, Haihua & Bu, Yi & Zhao, Zhenyue & Zhang, Jiarong & Li, Jiang, 2022. "Citation bias in measuring knowledge flow: Evidence from the web of science at the discipline level," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    10. Luigi Orsi & Andrea Ganzaroli & Ivan De Noni & Federica Marelli, 2016. "Evaluating post-acquisition technological performance by measuring absorption-related invention," International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 20(1/2), pages 117-146.
    11. Ismael Rafols & Martin Meyer, 2010. "Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity: case studies in bionanoscience," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(2), pages 263-287, February.
    12. Natalie Holden, 2015. "An exploration of interactive contextual and dispositional factors which influence a collective process of entrepreneurial activity: a novel case at Bristol Zoo," Working Papers 27, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised Nov 2015.
    13. Ismael Rafols & Alan Porter & Loet Leydesdorff, 2009. "Overlay Maps of Science: a New Tool for Research Policy," SPRU Working Paper Series 179, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    14. Yan, Erjia & Ding, Ying & Cronin, Blaise & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2013. "A bird's-eye view of scientific trading: Dependency relations among fields of science," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 249-264.
    15. Wang, Fang, 2024. "Does the recombination of distant scientific knowledge generate valuable inventions? An analysis of pharmaceutical patents," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    16. D’Ippolito, Beatrice & Rüling, Charles-Clemens, 2019. "Research collaboration in Large Scale Research Infrastructures: Collaboration types and policy implications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1282-1296.
    17. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Nicola Melluso & Francesco Alessandro Massucci, 2022. "Exploring the antecedents of interdisciplinarity at the European Research Council: a topic modeling approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 6961-6991, December.
    18. Ruimin Ma & Erjia Yan, 2016. "Uncovering inter-specialty knowledge communication using author citation networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 839-854, November.
    19. Chiara Carusi & Giuseppe Bianchi, 2020. "A look at interdisciplinarity using bipartite scholar/journal networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 867-894, February.
    20. Larsen, Maria Theresa, 2011. "The implications of academic enterprise for public science: An overview of the empirical evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 6-19, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Interdisciplinary research; Cognitive distance; Basic and applied science; Cost of learning; Translational research;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions

    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:spr:scient:v:106:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-015-1784-2. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.