Interdisciplinary relations in some high‐priority fields of science and technology

Abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this research is to investigate the interdisciplinary relations in some high-priority fields of science and technology based on ISI data. Design/methodology/approach -This is an applied study using scientometric, citation analysis and network analysis methods. The study population consists of scientific articles of Iranian researchers in five fields that have been indexed in "WOS" database. These fields are included nanotechnology, biophysics, nuclear physics, sociology and communication. After identifying and extracting data from "WOS" (included 1,777 records), in order to determine the interdisciplinary relations and the evolution of these relationships, the citations of these records (41,080 citations) have been extracted and analysed. Findings -The results indicate all the studied scientific fields have self-citation and other-citation. Depending on the type of field, the rate of intra-disciplinary and extra-disciplinary citations is various. There is a positive correlation between co-authorship and interdisciplinary approach in all the studied fields. There is no significant relation between the number of citations and interdisciplinary approach. Overall, the results showed the use of only a bibliographic method cannot specify all aspects of interdisciplinarity of the scientific field. Simultaneous use of different analysis methods such as citation analysis, co-authorship analysis and bibliographic coupling is necessary in order to data exchange between fields. Originality/value -The analysis and mapping of interdisciplinary relations in a scientific field can provide useful information regarding connectivity and interdependence among areas. Through such studies, the status of cooperation between disciplines and the evolutionary trend of it is well defined. The results of these studies would also be useful in developing the interdisciplinary collaboration among professionals and understanding their information needs and plan to meet these needs.

Estudos de revisão: implicações conceituais e metodológicas

“…Desde a simples utilização de editores de planilhas, como o Excel, e ainda outros softwares que a partir de uma análise qualitativa permitem mais facilmente a visualização e tratamento de resultados quantitativos, como é o caso do Sphinxs (DIAS, 2009). Também o software NVivo (WILSON et al, 2011) tem sido utilizado por oferecer a possibilidade de geração de matrizes quantitativas, que podem facilmente ser importadas pelos editores de planilhas e softwares específicos para tratamento e análise quantitativa como o SPSS (SEDIGHI, 2013). Para a identificação de redes de colaboração, o software Pajek tem sido utilizado (CATALÁ-LOPEZ et al, 2012), dentre outros (COBO et al, 2011), por possibilitar também a visualização gráfica e quantitativa da colaboração de autoria, uma das variáveis analisadas em estudos bibliométricos.…”

Cross-fertilization of knowledge and technologies in collaborative research projects

“…New technology-based firms are most successful when they are moderately embedded in networks, with a mix of strong (efficiency) and weak (exploratory) ties (Bliemel and Maine, 2008). Networks have emergent properties (Eslami et al, 2013;Martinez-Torres, 2014;Sedighi, 2013) and having the right connections becomes as important as the actual generation and ownership of knowledge (Reagans and McEvily, 2003). In fact, there is growing evidence that networking is a beneficial mode of operation in innovation in any area (Harvey et al, 2013(Harvey et al, , 2015.…”