Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Measuring researcher interdisciplinarity

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We offer two metrics that together help gauge how interdisciplinary a body of research is. Both draw upon Web of Knowledge Subject Categories (SCs) as key units of analysis. We have assembled two substantial Web of Knowledge samples from which to determine how closely individual SCs relate to each other. “Integration” measures the extent to which a research article cites diverse SCs. “Specialization” considers the spread of SCs in which the body of research (e.g., the work of a given author in a specified time period) is published. Pilot results for a sample of researchers show a surprising degree of interdisciplinarity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chubin, D. E., Connolly, T. (1982). Research trails and science policies: local and extra-local negotiations of scientific work, In: N. Elias et al. (Eds), Scientific Establishments and Hierarchies. Sociology of the Sciences, Yearbook, Vol. 6, Dordrecht: D. Reidel, pp. 293–311.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Klein, J. T., Porter, A. L. (1990). Preconditions for interdisciplinary research, In: P. H. Birnbaum-More, F. A. Rossini, D. R. Baldwin (Eds), International Research Management, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 11–19.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Morillo, F., Bordons, M., Gomez, I. (2001), An approach to interdisciplinarity through bibliometric indicators, Scientometrics, 51: 203–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research, of the Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy (2005), Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research, Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Porter, A. L., Roessner, J. D., Cohen, A. S., Perreault, M. (2006), Interdisciplinary research — meaning, metrics, and nurture, Research Evaluation, 15(8): 187–195.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dietz, J. S., Compalov, I., Bozeman, B., O’Neil Lane, E., Park, J. (2000), Using the curriculum vita to study the career paths of scientists and engineers: An exploratory assessment, Scientometrics, 49: 419–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Leahey, E. (2006), Gender differences in productivity — Research specialization as a missing link, Gender & Society, 20(6): 754–780.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Porter, A. L., Cunningham, S. W. (2005), Tech Mining: Exploiting Technologies for Competitive Advantage, New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Porter, A., Kongthon, A., Lu, J. (2002), Research profiling: improving the literature review. Scientometrics, 53: 351–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Del Rio, J. A., Kostoff, R. N., Garcia, E. O., Ramirez, A. M., Humenik, J. A. (2001), Citation mining: Integrating text mining and bibliometrics for reearch user profiling, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52(13): 1148–1156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Watts, R. J., Porter, A. L. (2005), Mining conference proceedings for corporate technology knowledge management, Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), Portland, OR.

  12. Cunningham, S. W. (1996), The Content Evaluation of British Scientific Research, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Sussex: Science Policy Research Unit.

  13. Morillo, F., Bordons, M., Gomez, 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Moya-Anegon, F., Vargas-Quesada, B., Herrero-Solana, V., Chinchilla-Rodriguez, Z., Corera-Alvarez, E., Munoz-Fernandez, F. J. (2004), A new technique for building maps of large scientific domains based on the cocitation of classes and categories, Scientometrics, 61: 129–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Boyack, K. W., Klavans, R., Borner, K. (2005), Mapping the backbone of science, Scientometrics, 64: 351–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Eto, H. (2003), Interdisciplinary information input and output of nano-technology project, Scientometrics, 58: 5–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Peters, H. P. F., Braam, R. R., van Raan, A. F. J. (1995), Cognitive resemblance and citation relations in chemical engineering publications, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46(1): 9–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Klavans, R., Boyack, K. W. (2006), Identifying a better measure of relatedness for mapping science, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(2): 251–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Porter, A. L., Chubin, D. E. (1985), An indicator of interdisciplinary research, Scientometrics, 8: 161–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Academies Keck Futures Initiative (NAKFI), Irvine, CA, USA

    Alan L. Porter, Alex S. Cohen, J. David Roessner & Marty Perreault

  2. Technology Policy and Assessment Center, Georgia Tech, Atlanta, GA, USA

    Alan L. Porter

Authors
  1. Alan L. Porter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alex S. Cohen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. David Roessner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marty Perreault
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Alan L. Porter or Marty Perreault.

Additional information

Alan Porter is an Evaluation Consultant with the National Academies Keck Futures Initiative (NAKFI), and he co-directs the Technology Policy and Assessment Center, Georgia Tech, and is Director of R&D, Search Technology. Alex Cohen, Evaluation Research Associate / Programmer, and Marty Perreault, Program Director, are staff with the U.S. NAKFI. David Roessner is the NAKFI Senior Evaluation Consultant, and also co-directs the Technology Policy and Assessment Center at Georgia Tech and is with SRI International as well.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Porter, A.L., Cohen, A.S., David Roessner, J. et al. Measuring researcher interdisciplinarity. Scientometrics 72, 117–147 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1700-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1700-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation