Does Interdisciplinary Research Lead to Higher Citation Impact? The Different Effect of Proximal and Distal Interdisciplinarity

Abstract

This article analyses the effect of degree of interdisciplinarity on the citation impact of individual publications for four different scientific fields. We operationalise interdisciplinarity as disciplinary diversity in the references of a publication, and rather than treating interdisciplinarity as a monodimensional property, we investigate the separate effect of different aspects of diversity on citation impact: i.e. variety, balance and disparity. We use a Tobit regression model to examine the effect of these properties of interdisciplinarity on citation impact, controlling for a range of variables associated with the characteristics of publications. We find that variety has a positive effect on impact, whereas balance and disparity have a negative effect. Our results further qualify the separate effect of these three aspects of diversity by pointing out that all three dimensions of interdisciplinarity display a curvilinear (inverted U-shape) relationship with citation impact. These findings can be interpreted in two different ways. On the one hand, they are consistent with the view that, while combining multiple fields has a positive effect in knowledge creation, successful research is better achieved through research efforts that draw on a relatively proximal range of fields, as distal interdisciplinary research might be too risky and more likely to fail. On the other hand, these results may be interpreted as suggesting that scientific audiences are reluctant to cite heterodox papers that mix highly disparate bodies of knowledge—thus giving less credit to publications that are too groundbreaking or challenging.

Interdisciplinary research has consistently lower funding success

“…To this end, we use information supplied on funding applications to score each proposal on the disparity and balance of the component disciplines 12 . We base our analysis on methods established in evolutionary biology to account for relatedness between biological lineages, but instead of using an evolutionary tree (phylogeny), we use a hierarchical classification of research fields.…”

Multi-disciplinarity breeds diversity: the influence of innovation project characteristics on diversity creation in nanotechnology

“…In the case of publications and patents this is often done by looking at citation patterns or pre-existing categories (Boschma et al 2014;Rafols and Meyer 2010;Yegros-Yegros et al 2015). Yet these measures are not applicable to our project data, as we only have access to the abstracts.…”

“…In line with suggestions by (Rafols and Meyer 2010;Yegros-Yegros et al 2015), we measured the degree of multi-disciplinarity by the diversity of topics. Instead of looking at how often a combination of topics occurs at the system level, we calculated the diversity of topics within a project, using the probabilities from the LDA and Eq.…”

Long term productivity and collaboration in information science

“…For example, collaboration between similar fields may be generating more citations than collaboration between distant fields (Yegros-Yegros, Rafols, & D'Este, 2015).…”