Analysing Institutions Interdisciplinarity by Extensive Use of Rao-Stirling Diversity Index

Cassi, Lorenzo; Champeimont, Raphaël; Mescheba, Wilfriedo; Turckheim, Élisabeth de

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0170296

Cited by 26 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the scientometric literature, this measure Δ is widely called the "Rao-Stirling diversity indicator" (e.g., Cassi, Champeimont, Mescheba, & de Turckheim, 2017) as different, for example, from Simpson diversity (Simpson, 1949) or Shannon entropy (Shannon, 1948). The right-most factor of Eq.…”

Section: The Measurement Of Interdisciplinarity In Terms Of Diversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Interdisciplinarity as diversity in citation patterns among journals: Rao-Stirling diversity, relative variety, and the Gini coefficient

Leydesdorff

Wagner

Bornmann

2019

Journal of Informetrics

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Questions of definition and measurement continue to constrain a consensus on the measurement of interdisciplinarity. Using Rao-Stirling (RS) Diversity produces sometimes anomalous results.We argue that these unexpected outcomes can be related to the use of "dual-concept diversity" which combines "variety" and "balance" in the definitions (ex ante). We propose to modify RS Diversity into a new indicator (DIV) which operationalizes "variety," "balance," and "disparity" independently and then combines them ex post. "Balance" can be measured using the Gini coefficient. We apply DIV to the aggregated citation patterns of 11,487 journals covered by the Journal Citation Reports 2016 of the Science Citation Index and the Social Sciences CitationIndex as an empirical domain and, in more detail, to the citation patterns of 85 journals assigned to the Web-of-Science category "information science & library science" in both the cited and citing directions. We compare the results of the indicators and show that DIV provides improved results in terms of distinguishing between interdisciplinary knowledge integration (citing) versus knowledge diffusion (cited). The new diversity indicator and RS diversity measure different features. A routine for the measurement of the various operationalizations of diversity (in any data matrix) is made available online.

show abstract

Section: The Measurement Of Interdisciplinarity In Terms Of Diversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Interdisciplinarity as diversity in citation patterns among journals: Rao-Stirling diversity, relative variety, and the Gini coefficient

Leydesdorff

Wagner

Bornmann

2019

Journal of Informetrics

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Until recently, patterns of interdisciplinarity have been analyzed predominantly with coarse approximations of how concepts are used among and within subdisciplines, for example, the number of citations among (or within) subdisciplines, journals, or authors (Cassi, Champeimont, Mescheba, & Turckheim, 2017;Pan et al, 2012;Vaz et F I G U R E 1 Illustration of interdisciplinarity that represents concept diversity across subdisciplines (blue arrows) and subdiscipline diversity across concepts (orange arrows), respectively. SD indicates subdiscipline (classified by Thomson Reuters), and concept (classified by a topic model) indicates a topic or an idea.…”

Section: Me Thodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution of interdisciplinarity in biodiversity science

Craven

Winter

Hotzel³

et al. 2019

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study of biodiversity has grown exponentially in the last thirty years in response to demands for greater understanding of the function and importance of Earth's biodiversity and finding solutions to conserve it. Here, we test the hypothesis that biodiversity science has become more interdisciplinary over time. To do so, we analyze 97,945 peer‐reviewed articles over a twenty‐two‐year time period (1990–2012) with a continuous time dynamic model, which classifies articles into concepts (i.e., topics and ideas) based on word co‐occurrences. Using the model output, we then quantify different aspects of interdisciplinarity: concept diversity, that is, the diversity of topics and ideas across subdisciplines in biodiversity science, subdiscipline diversity, that is, the diversity of subdisciplines across concepts, and network structure, which captures interactions between concepts and subdisciplines. We found that, on average, concept and subdiscipline diversity in biodiversity science were either stable or declining, patterns which were driven by the persistence of rare concepts and subdisciplines and a decline in the diversity of common concepts and subdisciplines, respectively. Moreover, our results provide evidence that conceptual homogenization, that is, decreases in temporal β concept diversity, underlies the observed trends in interdisciplinarity. Together, our results reveal that biodiversity science is undergoing a dynamic phase as a scientific discipline that is consolidating around a core set of concepts. Our results suggest that progress toward addressing the biodiversity crisis via greater interdisciplinarity during the study period may have been slowed by extrinsic factors, such as the failure to invest in research spanning across concepts and disciplines. However, recent initiatives such as the Intergovernmental Science‐Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) may attract broader support for biodiversity‐related issues and hence interdisciplinary approaches to address scientific, political, and societal challenges in the coming years.

show abstract

“…From another perspective, the value of interdisciplinarity in research has been critically examined [28]. Various researchers have explored the value of interdisciplinarity in terms of citation and funding.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leveraging Interdisciplinary Education Toward Securing the Future of Connected Health Research in Europe: Qualitative Study

Chouvarda¹,

Mountford²,

Trajkovik³

et al. 2019

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundConnected health (CH) technologies have resulted in a paradigm shift, moving health care steadily toward a more patient-centered delivery approach. CH requires a broad range of disciplinary expertise from across the spectrum to work in a cohesive and productive way. Building this interdisciplinary relationship at an earlier stage of career development may nurture and accelerate the CH developments and innovations required for future health care.ObjectiveThis study aimed to explore the perceptions of interdisciplinary CH researchers regarding the design and delivery of an interdisciplinary education (IDE) module for disciplines currently engaged in CH research (engineers, computer scientists, health care practitioners, and policy makers). This study also investigated whether this module should be delivered as a taught component of an undergraduate, master’s, or doctoral program to facilitate the development of interdisciplinary learning.MethodsA qualitative, cross-institutional, multistage research approach was adopted, which involved a background study of fundamental concepts, individual interviews with CH researchers in Greece (n=9), and two structured group feedback sessions with CH researchers in Ireland (n=10/16). Thematic analysis was used to identify the themes emerging from the interviews and structured group feedback sessions.ResultsA total of two sets of findings emerged from the data. In the first instance, challenges to interdisciplinary work were identified, including communication challenges, divergent awareness of state-of-the-art CH technologies across disciplines, and cultural resistance to interdisciplinarity. The second set of findings were related to the design for interdisciplinarity. In this regard, the need to link research and education with real-world practice emerged as a key design concern. Positioning within the program context was also considered to be important with a need to balance early intervention to embed integration with later repeat interventions that maximize opportunities to share skills and experiences.ConclusionsThe authors raise and address challenges to interdisciplinary program design for CH based on an abductive approach combining interdisciplinary and interprofessional education literature and the collection of qualitative data. This recipe approach for interdisciplinary design offers guidelines for policy makers, educators, and innovators in the CH space. Gaining insight from CH researchers regarding the development of an IDE module has offered the designers a novel insight regarding the curriculum, timing, delivery, and potential challenges that may be encountered.

show abstract

Analysing Institutions Interdisciplinarity by Extensive Use of Rao-Stirling Diversity Index

Cited by 26 publications

References 25 publications

Interdisciplinarity as diversity in citation patterns among journals: Rao-Stirling diversity, relative variety, and the Gini coefficient

Interdisciplinarity as diversity in citation patterns among journals: Rao-Stirling diversity, relative variety, and the Gini coefficient

Evolution of interdisciplinarity in biodiversity science

Leveraging Interdisciplinary Education Toward Securing the Future of Connected Health Research in Europe: Qualitative Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About