A Distinction on Variety and Impact of Interdisciplinary Research at the Interdisciplinary, Multidisciplinary, Intra-disciplinary and Cross-disciplinary Levels and an Overlook on Inter and Intradepartmental Cooperation in Basic Sciences Fields

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Department of Information Science and Knowledge Studies, University of Shiraz

2 M.A. in Information Science and Knowledge Studies, University of Shi-raz

Abstract

Purpose:The present research was conducted to assess the variety and the research impact of these levels of interdisciplinary and cooperation at inter-departmental and intradepartmental levels.
Methodology: This research is a descriptive survey. The research population includes the indexed papers in the field of basic science in the Scopus database as well as their authors.  The samples are recruited from among whole articles published in 2012 through purposive and clustered sampling. During data analysis, articles and their authors’ views are investigated and analyzed through descriptive and inferential statistics.
Findings: Come to take it as an interdisciplinary study, physics on the level of multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary, and chemistry on the level of interdisciplinary and cross-disciplinary recorded a better position and ranked first. Furthermore, there is no meaningful difference among interdisciplinary levels as their citations. The most interdepartmental and intradepartmental cooperations, physics and chemistry, ranked first, respectively.
Conclusion: Although the trend of three fields of basic science to being interdisciplinary is increasing, the rate of interdisciplinarity and its pattern among fields is different. Despite that, a strong tendency to be interdisciplinary shows the significance of developing interdisciplinary fields in universities, especially in physics and chemistry.

Keywords

References

برادر، رویا، تاجداران، منصور، سیدموسوی، سید مجید و عابدی، هدی (1388). بررسی روابط میان‌رشته‌ای مقالات علم و فناوری نانوی ایران، نمایه‌شده در ISI، تا پایان سال 2007 میلادی: مطالعه استنادی، پنجمین همایش دانشجویی فناوری نانو، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی تهران، دانشکده فناوری‌های نوین پزشکی، تهران. بازیابی‌شده از:.https://www.civilica.com/Paper-NANOSC05-NANOSCO5_061.html
خورسندی طاسکوه، علی (1388). تنوع گونه‌شناختی در آموزش و پژوهش میان‌رشته‌ای. فصلنامه مطالعات میان‌رشته‌ای در علوم انسانی. 4 (1): 57-83.  
داورپناه، محمدرضا. (1384). روابط میان‌رشته‌ای در علوم انسانی: تحلیلی استنادی. دوفصلنامه مطالعات تربیتی و روانشناسی دانشگاه فردوسی. 18: 17-36.
درزی، قاسم، فرامرز قراملکی، احد، و پهلوان، منصور. (1392). گونه‌شناسی مطالعات میان‌رشته‌ای در قرآن کریم. فصلنامه مطالعات میان‌رشته‌ای در علوم انسانی، 5(4): 73-102.
رولاند، اس (1387). میان‌رشتگی. مترجم: مجید کرمی، در مجموعه مقالات مبانی نظری و روش‌شناسی مطالعات میان‌رشته‌ای، ترجمه سید محسن علوی‌پور و همکاران، تهران: پژوهشکده مطالعات اجتماعی و فرهنگی.
ستوده، هاجر و دیدگاه، فرشته. (1388). بررسی تعاملات میان‌رشته‌ای حوزه علوم کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی با سایر رشته‌ها با استفاده از تحلیل استنادی این حوزه. مجموعه مقالات سومین همایش سراسری دانشجویی کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی. تهران: نشر کتابدار.
شعبانی ورکی، بختیار، بابادی، امین. (1393). تکثررشته‌ای؛ علیه فهم رایج از همکاری رشته‌ها. فصلنامه مطالعات میان‌رشته‌ای در علوم انسانی،7 (1)، 1-25. 
صدیقی، مهری. (1391). تحلیل روابط و الگوهای میان‌رشته‌ای در منتخبی از حوزه‌های الویت‌دار علم و فناوری. فصلنامه علمی پژوهشی پژوهشگاه علوم و فناوری اطلاعات ایران. 29 (1): 165-190.
یوسفی، زهرا، طاهریان، آمنه و عصاره، فریده (1391). بررسی روند برقراری روابط بین‌رشته‌ای و دریافت استناد از سایر حوزه‌ها توسط مقالات حوزه علوم کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی ایران در پایگاه وب آو ساینس طی سال‌های 1990-2011. مجله مطالعات کتابداری و علم اطلاعات دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز. 11: 37-56.
Abbott, A. (2001). Chaos of disciplines. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago.USA.
Aboelela, S. W., Larson, E., Bakken, S., Carrasquillo, O., Formicola, A., Glie   S. A., ... and  Gebbie, K.M. (2007). Defining interdisciplinary research: Conclusions from a critical review of the  literature. Health services research, 42(11), 329-346.  
Abramo, G, Dangelo, C A, Zhang, L. (2018). A comparison of two approaches measuring   interdisciplinary research output: The disciplinary diversity of authors vs the disciplinary diversity of reference list. Journal of informatics. 12 (4), 1182-1193.
Adams, J., Jackson, L., & Marshall, S. (2007). Bibliometric analysis of   interdisciplinary research. Report to Higher Education Funding Council for England. Retrieved from http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100202100434/http://hefce.ac.uk/pubs/rdreports/2007/rd19_07.  
Augsburg, T. (2016). Becoming interdisciplinary: An introduction to interdisciplinary studies. Kendall/Hunt Pub.USA
Bretscher, A. (2008). Why an interdisciplinary biological research institute now? Cornell Chronicle. Retrieved from http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2008/12/why-interdisciplinary-research-institutes-now .
Bruce, A., Lyall, C., Tait, J., Williams, R.(2004). Interdisciplinary integration in Europe: the case of the Fifth Framework programme. Futures, 36(4), 457-470.
Carr, G, Loucks, D P, and Bloschi, G. (2018). Gaining insight into interdisciplinary research and    education programs: A framework for evaluation. Research Policy, 47, 35-48.
Chang, Y. W., and Huang, M. H. (2012). A study of the evolution of interdisciplinarity in library and information science: Using three bibliometric methods. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 63(1), 22-33.
Chang, Y W. (2018), Exploring the interdisciplinary characteristics of library and information science from perspective of interdisciplinary LIS authors. Library and information science research. 40 (2), 125-134.
Chen, S., Arsenault, C., and Larivière, V. (2015). Are top-cited papers more interdisciplinary?. Journal of Informetrics, 9(4), 1034-1046.
Chen, S., Arsenault, C., Gingras, Y., and Larivière, V. (2015). Exploring the interdisciplinary evolution of a discipline: the case of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. Scientometrics, 102(2), 1307-1323.
Chen, S., Gingras, Y., Arsenault, C., and Larivière, V. (2014). Interdisciplinarity patterns of highly‐cited papers: A cross‐disciplinary analysis. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 51(1), 1-4.
Cooper, G. (2013). A disciplinary matter: critical sociology, academic governance and interdisciplinarity. Sociology, 47(1), 74-89.
Cummings, J. N., and Kiesler, S. (2014). Organization theory and the changing nature of science. Journal of Organization Design, 3(3), 1-16.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., and Trow, M. (1998). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. Sagepub. California, USA.
Jacobs, J. A. and Henderson, R.(2012). Interdisciplinarity in Recently Founded Academic Journals. American Sociological Association Meetings in Denver, Colorado, August. Available on https://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1036&context=psc_working_ papers.
Larivière, V., and Gingras, Y. (2014). Measuring interdisciplinarity. In Cronin, B. and Sugimoto, C. R. (Eds.), Beyond bibliometrics: Harnessing multidimensional indicators of scholarly impact, MA: MIT Press, Camridge, pp. 197–200).
Larivière, V., and Gingras, Y. (2010). On the relationship between interdisciplinarity and scientific impact. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(1), 126-131.
Levitt, J. M., and Thelwall, M. (2009). The most highly cited Library and Information Science articles: Interdisciplinarity, first authors and citation patterns. Scientometrics, 78(1), 45-67.
Liu, Y., Rafols, I., and Rousseau, R. (2012). A framework for knowledge integration and diffusion. Journal of Documentation, 68(1), 31-44.
Lund declaration. (2009). Europe must focus on the grand challenges of our time. Swedish Presidency Research Conference in Lund. New Times New Solutions, Lund, 7-9 July.
Mor, F. (2014) . The necessity of transition from disciplinary science to integrated science. Presentation. Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.
Morillo, F., Bordons, M., and Gómez, I. (2003). Interdisciplinarity in science: A tentative typology of disciplines and research areas. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology, 54(13), 1237-1249.
Nègre, A. (2017). A transdisciplinary approach to science and astrology. Retrieved from  http://veden-akademie.de/index.php?article_id=73&clang=1. May 2017
Newell, W. H., and Green, W. J. (1982). Defining and teaching interdisciplinary studies. Improving college and university teaching, 30(1), 23-30.
Porter, A. L., and Chubin, D. E. (1985). An indicator of cross-disciplinary research. Scientometrics, 8(3-4), 161-176.
Porter, A. L., Roessner, J. D., Cohen, A. S., and Perreault, M. (2006). Interdisciplinary research: meaning, metrics and nurture. Research evaluation, 15(3), 187-195.
Rafols, I. (2007). Strategies for knowledge acquisition in bionanotechnology: Why are interdisciplinary practices less widespread than expected?. Innovation, 20(4), 395-412.
Refsum Jensenius,  , A. Disciplinarities: intra, cross, multi, inter, trans. Available on: http://www.arj.no/2012/03/12/disciplinarities-2, 2017
Rinia, E. D., Van Leeuwen, T., Bruins, E., Van Vuren, H., and Van Raan, A. (2001). Citation delay in interdisciplinary knowledge exchange. Scientometrics, 51(1), 293-309.
Rinia, E., van Leeuwen, T., and van Raan, A. (2002). Impact measures of interdisciplinary research in physics. Scientometrics, 53(2), 241-248.
Siedlok, F., and Hibbert, P. (2014). The organization of interdisciplinary research: modes, drivers and barriers. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16(2), 194-210.
Steele, T. W., and  Stier, J. C. (2000). The impact of interdisciplinary research in the environmental sciences: A forestry case study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(5), 476–484.
Stirling, A., (1998). On the economics and analysis of diversity, SPRU Electronic Working Papers, Accessed on : http://www.sussex.ac.uk/Units/spru/publications/imprint/sewps/sewp28/ sewp28.pdf.2011.
Tang, R. (2004). Evolution of the interdisciplinary characteristics of information and library science. Proceedings of the American Society for information Science and Technology, 41(1), 54-63.
Turner, S., 2000. What are disciplines? And how is interdisciplinarity different? In: Weingart, P., Stehr, N., (Eds.), Practising interdisciplinarity Universit,y of Toronto Press, Toronto, pp. 46-65.
Van Rijnsoever, F.J., Hessels, L.K.(2011). Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration. Research Policy, 40(3), 463-472.
Wang, K., Sha, C., Wang, X., and Zhou, A. (2014). Based on Citation Diversity to Explore Influential Papers for Interdisciplinarity. In Web Technologies and Applications. Springer International Publishing. Netherland,pp. 343-354
Yegros, A., Rafols, I., and D’Este, P. (2015). Does interdisciplinary research lead to higher citation impact? The different effect of proximal and distal interdisciplinarity. PlOS one, 10(8), e0135095.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics