Measuring interdisciplinarity of research articles: An analysis of inter-relatedness of different parameters

Abstract

With evolution of knowledge disciplines and cross fertilization of ideas, research outputs reported as scientific papers are now becoming more and more interdisciplinary. An interdisciplinary research work usually involves ideas and approaches from multiple disciplines of knowledge applied to solve a specific problem. In many cases the interdisciplinary areas eventually emerge as full-fledged disciplines. In the last two decades, several approaches have been proposed to measure the Interdisciplinarity of a scientific article, such as propositions based on authorship, references, set of keywords etc. Among all these approaches, reference-set based approach is most widely used. The diversity of knowledge in the reference set has been measured with three parameters, namely variety, balance, and disparity. Different studies tried to combine these measures in one way or other to propose an aggregate measure of interdisciplinarity, called integrated diversity. However, there is a lack of understanding on inter-relations between these parameters. This paper tries to look into inter-relatedness between the three parameters by analytical study on an important interdisciplinary research area, Internet of Things (IoT). Research articles in IoT, as obtained from Web of Science for the year 2018 have been analyzed to compute the three measures and understand their inter-relatedness. Results obtained show that variety and balance are negatively correlated, variety and disparity do not show a stable relatedness and balance and disparity are negatively correlated. Further, the integrated diversity measure is negatively correlated with variety and weakly positively correlated with balance and disparity. The results imply that the composite integrated diversity measure may not be a suitably constructed composite measure of interdisciplinarity.

Keywords

Diversity interdisciplinarity interdisciplinary research multidisciplinary research

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

, et al., Understanding the formation of interdisciplinary research from the perspective of keyword evolution: a case study on joint attention, Scientometrics117(2) (2018), 973–995.

Salton

and McGill

, Introduction to Modem Information. Auckland, New Zealand: McGraw - Hill, (1983).

Rafols

and Meyer

, Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity: Case studies in bionanoscience, Scientometrics82(2) (2010), 263–287.

Boyack

K.W.

and Klavans

, Atypical combinations are confounded by disciplinary effects, in Proceedings of the science and technology indicators conference 2014 Leiden “Context Counts: Pathways to Master Big and Little Data,” (2014), pp. 64–71.

Mishra

and Torvik

V.I.

, Quantifying conceptual novelty in the biomedical literature, D-Lib Mag Mag Digit Libr Forum22 no. 9/10, (2016).

Tahamtan

and Bornmann

, Creativity in science and the link to cited references: Is the creative potential of papers reflected in their cited references?, J Informetr12 (2018), 906–930.

Wang

, Knowledge Creation in Collaboration Networks: Effects of Tie Configuration, Res Policy45 (2016), 68–80.

Porter

A.L.

and Rafols

, Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time, Scientometrics81(3) (2009), 719–745.

Leydesdorff

, Wagner

C.S.

and Bornmann

, Interdisciplinarity as diversity in citation patterns among journals: Rao-Stirling diversity, relative variety, and the Gini coefficient, J Informetr13(1) (2019), 255–269.

10.

Garfield

, Malin

V.M.

and Small

, Citation Data as Science Indicators, in Toward a Metric of a Science, Y. Elkana, J. Lederberg, R. Merton, A. Thackray, and H. Zuckerman, Eds. (1978), pp. 179–208.

11.

Stokols

, et al., Evaluating transdisciplinary science, Nicotine Tob Res5SUPPL. 1, (2003), 21–39.

12.

Lattuca

L.R.

, Creating interdisciplinarity: grounded definitions from college and university faculty, Hist Intellect Cult3(1) (2003), 1–20.

13.

Porter

A.L.

, Roessner

J.D.

, Cohen

A.S.

and Perreault

, Interdisciplinary research: meaning, metrics & nurture, Res Eval15(3) (2006), 187–195.

14.

Aboelela

S.W.

, et al., Defining interdisciplinary research: Conclusions from a critical review of the literature, Health Serv Res42(1) I, (2007), 329–346.

15.

Schmidt

J.C.

, Towards a philosophy of interdisciplinarity. An attempt to provide a classification and clarification, Poiesis and Prax5(1) (2008), 53–69.

16.

Abramo

, D’Angelo

C.A.

and Zhang

, A comparison of two approaches for measuring interdisciplinary research output: The disciplinary diversity of authors vs the disciplinary diversity of the reference list, J Informetr12(4) (2018), 1182–1193.

17.

Wagner

C.S.

, et al., Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): A review of the literature, J Informetr5(1) (2011), 14–26.

18.

Van Den Besselaar

and Heimeriks

, Disciplinary,Multidisciplinary, Interdisciplinary: Concepts and Indicators, in The 8th Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics – ISSI2001, (2001), pp. 70–716.

19.

Morillo

, Bordons

and Gómez

, An approach to interdisciplinarity through bibliometric indicators, Scientometrics51(1) (2001), 203–222.

20.

Levitt

J.M.

and Thelwall

, The most highly cited Library and Information Science articles: Interdisciplinarity, first authors and citation patterns, Scientometrics78(1) (2008), 45–67.

21.

Rao

C.R.

, Diversity: its measurement, decomposition apportionment and analysis, Sankya Indian J Stat44 (1982), 1–22.

22.

Stirling

, On the Economics and Analysis of Diversity, ... , Sci Policy Res Unit (SPRU), Electron.28 (1998), 1–156.

23.

Stirling

, A general framework for analysing diversity in science, technology and society, J R Soc Interface4(15) (2007), 707–719.

24.

National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. 2005. Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/11153.

25.

Porter

A.L.

and Chubin

D.E.

, An indicator of cross-disciplinary research, Scientometrics8(3–4) (1985), 161–176.

26.

Morillo

, Bordons

and Gómez

, Interdisciplinary in science: A tentative typology of disciplines and research areas, J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol54(13) (2003), 1237–1249.

27.

Schummer

, Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology, Scientometrics59(3) (2004), 425–465.

28.

Porter

A.L.

, Cohen

A.S.

, David Roessner

and Perreault

, Measuring researcher interdisciplinarity, Scientometrics72(1) (2007).

29.

Porter

A.L.

, Roessner

J.D.

and Heberger

A.E.

, How interdisciplinary is a given body of research?, Res Eval17(4) (2008), 273–282.

30.

Mugabushaka

A.M.

, Kyriakou

and Papazoglou

, Bibliometric indicators of interdisciplinarity: the potential of the Leinster–Cobbold diversity indices to study disciplinary diversity, Scientometrics107(2) (2016), 593–607.

31.

Zhou

, Rousseau

, Yang

, Yue

and Yang

, A general framework for describing diversity within systems and similarity between systems with applications in informetrics, Scientometrics93(3) (2012), 787–812.

32.

Wang

, Thijs

and Glänzel

, Interdisciplinarity and Impact: Distinct Effects of Variety, Balance, and Disparity, PLoS One10(5) p. e0127298, (2015).

33.

Jang

, Kwon

, Park

and Lee

, Predicting the degree of interdisciplinarity in academic fields: the case of nanotechnology, Scientometrics116(1) (2018), 231–254.

34.

Abramo

, D’Angelo

C.A.

and Di Costa

, Identifying interdisciplinarity through the disciplinary classification of coauthors of scientific publications, J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol63(11) (2012), 2206–2222.

35.

Karlovčec

and Mladenić

, Interdisciplinarity of scientific fields and its evolution based on graph of project collaboration and co-authoring, Scientometrics102(1) (2015), 433–454.

36.

Bergmann

, Dale

, Sattari

, Heit

and Bhat

H.S.

, The Interdisciplinarity of Collaborations in Cognitive Science, Cognitive Science Wiley-Blackwell Publishing41(5) (2017), 1412–1418.

37.

Leydesdorff

, Betweenness centrality as an indicator of the interdisciplinary of scientific journals, J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol58(9) (2007), 1303–1319.

38.

Chi

and Young

, The interdisciplinary structure of research on intercultural relations: A co-citation network analysis study, Scientometrics96(1) (2013), 147–171.

39.

Nichols

L.G.

, A topic model approach to measuring interdisciplinarity at the National Science Foundation, Scientometrics100(3) (2014), 741–754.

40.

Chakraborty

, Role of interdisciplinarity in computer sciences: quantification, impact and life trajectory, Scientometrics114(3) (2018), 1011–1029.

41.

, Cao

, Mao

and Li

, A hierarchical approach to analyzing knowledge integration between two fields—a case study on medical informatics and computer science, Scientometrics119(3) (2019), 1455–1486.