This study examines the interdisciplinarity scores of papers published in five major Economic journals by analysing their references. It also explores the relationship between interdisciplinarity and citation. The study considers the influence of the citation time window on accumulating citations and investigates the source of citation advantage for high interdisciplinarity papers. Empirical findings reveal a U-shaped curve relationship between the interdisciplinarity of papers and their citation frequency. Papers with high interdisciplinarity do enjoy a citation advantage, which primarily stems from the attention and citations from distant disciplinary papers and multidisciplinary journals. However, it often takes a longer time for the value of interdisciplinary papers to be recognised. Based on these findings, the study discusses the necessity and effectiveness of incentives for interdisciplinary research and provides recommendations for evaluating and managing interdisciplinary research.
ApostelLO.Interdisciplinarity: problems of teaching and research in universities. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 1972.
2.
RepkoAF.Interdisciplinary research: process and theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2008.
3.
AlexanderJBacheKChaseJ, et al. An exploratory study of interdisciplinarity and breakthrough ideas. In: Proceedings of the 2013 PICMET’13: technology management in the IT-driven Services (PICMET), San Jose, CA, 28 July–1 August 2013, pp. 2130–2140. New York: IEEE.
4.
LawrenceMGWilliamsSNanzP, et al. Characteristics, potentials, and challenges of transdisciplinary research. One Earth2022; 5: 44–61.
5.
MackeyJDMcAllisterCP. Musing about interdisciplinary research: is interdisciplinary research amusing or bemusing?Group Organ Manage2022; 47: 899–906.
6.
WangJThijsBGlänzelW. Interdisciplinarity and impact: distinct effects of variety, balance, and disparity. PLoS One2015; 10: e0127298.
7.
OkamuraK. Interdisciplinarity revisited: evidence for research impact and dynamism. Palgrave Commun2019; 5: 141.
8.
WernliDDarbellayF. Interdisciplinarity and the 21st century research-intensive university. Leuven: League of European Research Universities (LERU), 2016.
9.
Van NoordenR. Interdisciplinary research by the numbers. Nature2015; 525: 306–307.
10.
Yegros-YegrosARafolsID’EsteP. Does interdisciplinary research lead to higher citation impact? The different effect of proximal and distal interdisciplinarity. PLoS One2015; 10: e0135095.
11.
LiBChenSLarivièreV. Interdisciplinarity affects the technological impact of scientific research. Scientometrics2023; 128: 6527–6559.
12.
BuYLuWWuY, et al. How wide is the citation impact of scientific publications? A cross-discipline and large-scale analysis. Inform Process Manag2021; 58: 102429.
13.
LarivièreVGingrasY. On the relationship between interdisciplinarity and scientific impact. J Am Soc Inf Sci Tec2010; 61: 126–131.
14.
ChenSSongYQiuJ, et al. The effect of interdisciplinary components’ citation intensity on scientific impact. Libr Hi Tech2021; 39: 1084–1096.
15.
XieYZhangCArefS. Economic globalization, knowledge diffusion, and innovation in China. Res Policy2011; 40: 108–124.
16.
PorterALRousseauR. The influence of allocation rules on the publication behavior of economists. Scientometrics1986; 9: 445–460.
17.
ZhangXLiuHZhangZ. Research on the relationship between interdisciplinary and academic influence of literature under different collaboration modes. Journal of Intelligence2021; 40(8): 164–173.
18.
SteeleTWStierJC. The impact of interdisciplinary research in the environmental sciences: a forestry case study. J Am Soc Inform Sci2000; 51: 476–484.
19.
LiuXZhaoJ. Interdisciplinary research intensity and its relationship with academic impact: based on articles and journals of information science and library science. Chinese J Sci Tech Periodic2021; 32: 411–417.
20.
ChenSArsenaultCLarivièreV. Are top-cited papers more interdisciplinary?J Informetr2015; 9: 1034–1046.
21.
WangGGanYYangH. The inverted U-shaped relationship between knowledge diversity of researchers and societal impact. Sci Rep2022; 12: 18585.
22.
LiuJSunJ. Research on the relationship between interdisciplinarity of references and academic influence. J China Soc Sci Tech Inform2023; 42: 525–536.
23.
ChangY-WHuangM-H. A study of the evolution of interdisciplinarity in library and information science: using three bibliometric methods. J Am Soc Inf Sci Tec2012; 63: 22–33.
24.
RiniaEJVan LeeuwenTNVan RaanAFJ. Impact measures of interdisciplinary research in physics. Scientometrics2002; 53: 241–248.
25.
LeaheyEBeckmanCMStankoTL. Prominent but less productive: the impact of interdisciplinarity on scientists’ research. Admin Sci Quart2017; 62: 105–139.
26.
ZuilhofH. Titles of highly cited papers: concise, generalizing, and specific. Langmuir2021; 37: 8895–8896.
27.
HeßlerNZieglerA. Evidence-based recommendations for increasing the citation frequency of original articles. Scientometrics2022; 127: 3367–3381.
28.
LovagliaMJ. Predicting citations to journal articles: the ideal number of references. Am Sociol1991; 22: 49–64.
29.
AbramoGD’AngeloCADi CostaF. Do interdisciplinary research teams deliver higher gains to science?Scientometrics2017; 111: 317–336.
30.
CardDDellaVignaS. Page limits on economics articles: evidence from two journals. J Econ Perspect2014; 28: 149–168.
31.
FoxCWPaineCETSautereyB. Citations increase with manuscript length, author number, and references cited in ecology journals. Ecol Evol2016; 6: 7717–7726.
32.
HuY-HTaiC-TLiuKE, et al. Identification of highly-cited papers using topic-model-based and bibliometric features: the consideration of keyword popularity. J Informetr2020; 14: 101004.
33.
ZhaoSXLouWTanAM, et al. Do funded papers attract more usage?Scientometrics2018; 115: 153–168.
34.
SanfilippoPHewittAWMackeyDA. Plurality in multi-disciplinary research: multiple institutional affiliations are associated with increased citations. PeerJ2018; 6: e5664.
35.
NiPAnX. Relationship between international collaboration papers and their citations from an economic perspective. Scientometrics2018; 116: 863–877.
36.
ParkMMaitySKWuchtyS, et al. Interdisciplinary papers supported by disciplinary grants garner deep and broad scientific impact, 2023, https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.14732
37.
González-BetancorSMDorta-GonzálezP. Publication modalities ‘article in press’ and ‘open access’ in relation to journal average citation. Scientometrics2019; 120: 1209–1223.
38.
Rovira-EstevaSAixeláJOlalla-SolerC. Citation patterns in translation studies: a format-dependent bibliometric analysis. Transl Interpret2019; 11: 147–171.
39.
ZhangYWangYDuH, et al. Delayed citation impact of interdisciplinary research. J Informetr2024; 18: 101468.
40.
Dorta-GonzálezPDorta-GonzálezMI. Impact maturity times and citation time windows: the 2-year maximum journal impact factor. J Informetr2013; 7: 593–602.
41.
SchreiberM. Restricting the h-index to a publication and citation time window: a case study of a timed Hirsch index. J Informetr2015; 9: 150–155.
42.
WangJ. Citation time window choice for research impact evaluation. Scientometrics2013; 94: 851–872.
43.
ZhangLSunBJiangL, et al. On the relationship between interdisciplinarity and impact: distinct effects on academic and broader impact. Res Evaluat2021; 30: 256–268.
44.
ChenSSongYShuF, et al. Interdisciplinarity and impact: the effects of the citation time window. Scientometrics2022; 127: 2621–2642.
45.
NishikawaK. How and why are citations between disciplines made? A citation context analysis focusing on natural sciences and social sciences and humanities. Scientometrics2023; 128: 2975–2997.
46.
DavisJBJovanovicF. Introduction to symposium: economics and its boundaries. J Hist Econ Thought2021; 43: 237–240.
47.
Calling all economists (Editorial material). Nature2020; 578: 489.
48.
BuYLiMGuW, et al. Topic diversity: a discipline scheme-free diversity measurement for journals. J Assoc Inf Sci Tech2021; 72: 523–539.
49.
HouJZhengBWangD, et al. How boundary-spanning paper sparkles citation: from citation count to citation network. J Informetr2023; 17: 101434.
50.
FontanaMIoriMLeone SciabolazzaV, et al. The interdisciplinarity dilemma: public versus private interests. Res Policy2022; 51: 104553.
51.
PichaiKSteinert-ThrelkeldTParkT. Bridging the gap: conceptual interdisciplinarity in the social sciences and humanities. Scientometrics2021; 126: 1495–1518.
52.
JamaliHRAbbasiABornmannL. Research diversification and its relationship with publication counts and impact: a case study based on Australian professors. J Inf Sci2020; 46: 131–144.
53.
KarmakarMSinghVPintoD. Measuring interdisciplinarity of research articles: an analysis of inter-relatedness of different parameters. J Intell Fuzzy Syst2020; 39: 2477–2485.
XuJMinCHuangW-B, et al. Interdisciplinarity vs. unidisciplinarity: a structural comparison of multi-generation citations and references. In: Proceedings of the 18th international conference on scientometrics & informetrics, KU Leuven, Leuven, 12–15 July 2021.
56.
ShannonCE. A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst Tech J1948; 27: 379–423.
57.
SimpsonEH. Measurement of diversity. Nature1949; 163: 688.
StirlingA. A general framework for analysing diversity in science, technology and society. J Roy Soc Interface2007; 4: 707–719.
60.
PorterALChubinDE. An indicator of cross-disciplinary research. Scientometrics1985; 8: 161–176.
61.
LermanRIYitzhakiS. A note on the calculation and interpretation of the Gini index. Econ Lett1984; 15: 363–368.
62.
PorterALRafolsI. Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time. Scientometrics2009; 81: 719–745.
63.
LeydesdorffLWagnerCSBornmannL. Interdisciplinarity as diversity in citation patterns among journals: Rao-Stirling diversity, relative variety, and the Gini coefficient. J Informetr2019; 13: 255–269.
64.
LiJYangXLuX, et al. Making journals more international: language subject differences and impact performance. Learn Publ2023; 36: 596–618.
65.
WuDLuXLiJ, et al. Does the institutional diversity of editorial boards increase journal quality? The case economics field. Scientometrics2020; 124: 1579–1597.
66.
LindJTMehlumH. With or without u? The appropriate test for a U-shaped relationship. Oxford B Econ Stat2010; 72: 109–118.
67.
ChenSSongYShuF, et al. Interdisciplinarity and impact: the effects of the citation time window. Scientometrics2022; 127: 2621–2642.
68.
NewmanJ. Promoting interdisciplinary research collaboration: a systematic review, a critical literature review, and a pathway forward. Soc Epistemol2024; 38: 135–151.
69.
FontanaMIoriMMontobbioF, et al. New and atypical combinations: an assessment of novelty and interdisciplinarity. Res Policy2020; 49: 104063.
70.
LeeY-NWalshJPWangJ. Creativity in scientific teams: unpacking novelty and impact. Res Policy2015; 44: 684–697.
71.
LiuXYiBLiM, et al. Is interdisciplinary collaboration research more disruptive than monodisciplinary research?Proc Assoc Inf Sci Technol2021; 58: 264–272.
72.
ChenSQiuJArsenaultC, et al. Exploring the interdisciplinarity patterns of highly cited papers. J Informetr2021; 15: 101124.
73.
ChenKRenX-TYangG-L. A novel approach for assessing academic journals: application of integer DEA model for management science and operations research field. J Informetr2021; 15: 101176.
