On the degree of interdisciplinarity of research programs: A quantitative assessment

It is widely maintained that the study of policy alternatives, particularly if they are associated with introducing new tehcnologies that may engender vast social and environmental repercussions, ought to be interdisciplinary. There is, however, much confusion in the literature as to what exactly is meant by the term interdisciplinary. In the present paper, we quantitatively assess the extent of interdisciplinarity of studies and of research programs. First, we propose several working definitions of the concept of interdisciplinarity. Second, we consider the construction of indicators that quantify these definitions. Third, as an example, we examine whether or not a given policy oriented research program is truly interdisciplinary.     

Multidisciplinarity,interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology

This paper first describes the recent development that scientists and engineers of many disciplines, countries, and institutions increasingly engage in nanoscale research at breathtaking speed. By co-author analysis of over 600 papers published in “nano journals” in 2002 and 2003, I investigate if this apparent concurrence is accompanied by new forms and degrees of multi- and interdisciplinarity as well as of institutional and geographic research collaboration. Based on a new visualization method, patterns of research collaboration are analyzed and compared with those of classical disciplinary research. I argue that current nanoscale research reveals no particular patterns and degrees of interdisciplinarity and that its apparent multidisciplinarity consists of different largely mono-disciplinary fields which are rather unrelated to each other and which hardly share more than the prefix “nano”. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity: case studies in bionanoscience

The multidimensional character and inherent conflict with categorisation of interdisciplinarity makes its mapping and evaluation a challenging task. We propose a conceptual framework that aims to capture interdisciplinarity in the wider sense of knowledge integration, by exploring the concepts of diversity and coherence. Disciplinary diversity indicators are developed to describe the heterogeneity of a bibliometric set viewed from predefined categories, i.e. using a top-down approach that locates the set on the global map of science. Network coherence indicators are constructed to measure the intensity of similarity relations within a bibliometric set, i.e. using a bottom-up approach, which reveals the structural consistency of the publications network. We carry out case studies on individual articles in bionanoscience to illustrate how these two perspectives identify different aspects of interdisciplinarity: disciplinary diversity indicates the large-scale breadth of the knowledge base of a publication; network coherence reflects the novelty of its knowledge integration. We suggest that the combination of these two approaches may be useful for comparative studies of emergent scientific and technological fields, where new and controversial categorisations are accompanied by equally contested claims of novelty and interdisciplinarity.     

Research collaboration in groups and networks: differences across academic fields

The purpose of this paper is to give a macro-picture of collaboration in research groups and networks across all academic fields in Norwegian research universities, and to examine the relative importance of membership in groups and networks for individual publication output. To our knowledge, this is a new approach, which may provide valuable information on collaborative patterns in a particular national system, but of clear relevance to other national university systems. At the system level, conducting research in groups and networks are equally important, but there are large differences between academic fields. The research group is clearly most important in the field of medicine and health, while undertaking research in an international network is most important in the natural sciences. Membership in a research group and active participation in international networks are likely to enhance publication productivity and the quality of research.     

Geometric approach to the degree of polarization for arbitrary fields

Abstract

The eigenvalue decomposition of the polarization matrix is employed to find out the geometric interpretation of the traditional degree of polarization and, in particular, of the degree of polarization for arbitrary electromagnetic fields put forward recently by Setälä et al. [2002, Phys. Rev. Lett., 88, 123902]. It is shown that both measures have similar geometric meaning as a measure for the purity of the polarization state. Possible extensions to the analysis are discussed.     

Comparative indicators of interdisciplinarity in modern science

A set of scientometric indicators of interdisciplinary links between advancing fields of biomedicine is suggested. Twenty jounals listed in theJCR of theSCI for 1988 are analyzed. An index of interdisciplinarity for a given journal is calculated as the sum of ratios between the numbers of journals from all other disciplines (except for general-scientific and miscellaneous journals) and from the same discipline cited by that journal or citing it, and of ratios between the numbers of citations to and by these journals. Some interdisciplinary patterns of 20 andrology journal articles are scientometrically assessed, too. The combined usage of this method with co-classification and co-citation methodology can optimize interdisciplinarity evaluation and promotion.     

An empirical approach to compare the performance of heterogeneous academic fields

In this paper, we propose a ‘scaling’ approach to compare the scientific performance of Italian heterogeneous academic disciplines. This method is based on the idea that, after eliminating the percentages of ‘silent’ researchers, the distribution of bibliometric parameters of the different academic fields can be superimposed and collapse into a unique master curve by a single scaling parameter. By using data on the scientific production of around 2,500 scholars of the university of Rome ‘La Sapienza’ from the Web of Science from 2004 to 2008, we (i) demonstrate the existence of a master curve, (ii) determine the scaling factors that work like rates of substitution to compare the scientific production across different academic fields on a common ground, (iii) show that the master bibliometric distribution follows a log-normal law and (iv) illustrate the relevance of the proposed approach for research assessment and allocation of competitive funding at the university level.     

Funding acknowledgement analysis: an enhanced tool to investigate research sponsorship impacts: the case of nanotechnology

There is increasing interest in assessing how sponsored research funding influences the development and trajectory of science and technology. Traditionally, linkages between research funding and subsequent results are hard to track, often requiring access to separate funding or performance reports released by researchers or sponsors. Tracing research sponsorship and output linkages is even more challenging when researchers receive multiple funding awards and collaborate with a variety of differentially-sponsored research colleagues. This article presents a novel bibliometric approach to undertaking funding acknowledgement analysis which links research outputs with their funding sources. Using this approach in the context of nanotechnology research, the article probes the funding patterns of leading countries and agencies including patterns of cross-border research sponsorship. We identify more than 91,500 nanotechnology articles published worldwide during a 12-month period in 2008–2009. About 67% of these publications include funding acknowledgements information. We compare articles reporting funding with those that do not (for reasons that may include reliance on internal core-funding rather than external awards as well as omissions in reporting). While we find some country and field differences, we judge that the level of reporting of funding sources is sufficiently high to provide a basis for analysis. The funding acknowledgement data is used to compare nanotechnology funding policies and programs in selected countries and to examine their impacts on scientific output. We also examine the internationalization of research funding through the interplay of various funding sources at national and organizational levels. We find that while most nanotechnology funding is nationally-oriented, internationalization and knowledge exchange does occur as researchers collaborate across borders. Our method offers a new approach not only in identifying the funding sources of publications but also in feasibly undertaking large-scale analyses across scientific fields, institutions and countries.     

Scanning the controls: genomics and nanotechnology

We outline some of the possible applications of nanotechnology to modern molecular biology and discuss several technologies that can be used to make nanoscale confining environments (channels or post arrays) for long polymers such as DNA. A particular emphasis is placed on making large arrays using non-electron beam lithography methods. We then discuss how focused ion beam (FIB) milling can be used to construct nearfield slits for examining molecules     

Internationalization and evolution of application areas of an emerging technology: The case of nanotechnology

Nanotechnology patenting has grown rapidly in recent years as an increasing number of countries are getting into the global nanotechnology race. Using a refined methodology to identify and classify nanotechnology patents, this paper analyses the changing pattern of internationalization of nanotechnology patenting activities from 1976–2004. We show that the dominance of the G5 countries have declined in recent years, not only in terms of quantity, but also in terms of quality as measured by citation indicators. In addition, using a new approach to classifying the intended areas of commercial applications, we show that nanotechnology patenting initially emphasized instrumentation, but exhibited greater diversification to other application areas in recent years. Significant differences in application area specialization are also found among major nanotechnology nations. Moreover, universities are found to play a significant and increasing role in patenting, particularly in US, UK and Canada.     

Overall degree of coherence for vectorial electromagnetic fields and the Wigner function

We elaborate the overall degree of coherence for vectorial electromagnetic waves within paraxial approximation, expressing it in terms of a polarization Wigner function and the spatial-angular Stokes parameters.     

Principal parameters affecting R&D exploitation of nanotechnology research: a case for Korea

The purpose of this study is to determine principal parameters which affect the R&D exploitation and to explore R&D activities in closed science that positively affect those in open science. Based on 486 nanotechnology projects from five national R&D programs in South Korea, canonical correlation analysis is used to analyze the relationships among R&D parameters of inputs, outputs and outcomes and to determine principle parameters. As a result, this study concludes that the principal parameters are publications with high impact, patents, and academic degrees. This study also shows a positive correlation between activities in open science and closed science. The conclusions suggest that research results with high impact value should be endorsed by the Korean government and should try to keep a balance between R&D exploitation in open science and closed science. This study would be used for establishing South Korea’s R&D policy effective for faster commercialization of nanotechnology related research.     

The dynamics of interdisciplinary research fields: the case of river research

Interdisciplinarity results from dynamics at two levels. Firstly, research questions are approached using inputs from a variety of disciplinary fields. Secondly, the results of this multidisciplinary research feed back into the various research fields. This may either contribute to the further development of these fields, or may lead to disciplinary reconfiguration. If the latter is the case, a new interdisciplinary field may emerge. Following this perspective, the scientific landscape of river research and river science is mapped to assess to which current river research is a multi-disciplinary endeavor, and to which extent it results in a new emerging (inter)disciplinary field of river science. The paper suggests that this two level approach is a useful method to study interdisciplinary research and, more generally, disciplinary dynamics. With respect to river research, we show that it is mainly performed in several fields (limnology, fisheries & fish research, hydrology & water resources, and geomorphology) that hardly exchange knowledge. The different river research topics are multidisciplinary in nature, as they are shared by different fields. However, river science does not emerge as an interdisciplinary field, and often-mentioned new interdisciplinary fields such as hydroecology or hydromorphology are not (yet) visible. There is hardly any involvement of social within river research. Finally, the field of ecology occupies a central position within river research, whereas an expected engineering field is shown absent. This together may signal the acceptance of the ecosystem-based paradigm in river management, replacing the traditional engineering paradigm.     

Globalization and de-globalization in nanotechnology research: the role of China

The share of nanotechnology publications involving authors from more than one country more than doubled in the 1990s, but then fell again until 2004, before recovering somewhat during the latter years of the decade. Meanwhile, the share of nanotechnology papers involving at least one Chinese author increased substantially over the last two decades. Papers involving Chinese authors are far less likely to be internationally co-authored than papers involving authors from other countries. Nonetheless, this appears to be changing as Chinese nanotechnology research becomes more advanced. An arithmetic decomposition confirms that China??s growing share of such research accounts, in large part, for the observed stagnation of international collaboration. Thus two aspects of the globalization of science can work in opposing directions: diffusion to initially less scientifically advanced countries can depress international collaboration rates, while at the same time scientific advances in such countries can reverse this trend. We find that the growth of China??s scientific community explains some, but not all of the dynamics of China??s international collaboration rate. We therefore provide an institutional account of these dynamics, drawing on Stichweh??s [Social Science information 35(2):327?C340, 1996] original paper on international scientific collaboration, which, in examining the interrelated development of national and international scientific networks, predicts a transitional phase during which science becomes a more national enterprise, followed by a phase marked by accelerating international collaboration. Validating the application of this approach, we show that Stichweh??s predictions, based on European scientific communities in the 18th and 19th centuries, seem to apply to the Chinese scientific community in the 21st century.