Researcher experiences in practice-based interdisciplinary research

Abstract

This article reports on a study that followed up on an initial interdisciplinary project and focused specifically on the experiences of researchers involved in practice-based interdisciplinary research. We share an approach to research evaluation that focuses on the experiences of those conducting the research rather than the outputs. The study allowed those involved in the initial successful project to reflect post hoc on their experiences. We show that neglecting fundamental conceptions about how the research is conceptualized can lead to challenges with the research itself. In addition to alternative understandings of research and concepts, practical and logistical issues, whilst seeming trivial, feed into communication issues such as misunderstanding of terms and language. We argue that tensions and confusions around the very nature of the research—what was being researched, and what was valued as research, epistemological differences between the disciplinary perspectives—need to be explored and interrogated in order to maximize the benefits of interdisciplinary research. We conclude with considerations of the relationship between interdisciplinary research in a team and identity work of team members, and the implications this may have for research design, an area of research evaluation that certainly needs further exploration.

Money, time, or saving the world

“…However, contrary to Schrøder and colleagues, we also found our researchers to give much weight to the conceptual and psychological dissection of the registers. This analytical tendency likely derives from the nature of work in academia and interdisciplinary projects, where a reflective, vocal approach to the foundational questions of what is researched is particularly important (Miller et al, 2008;Leigh & Brown, 2021). Based on our findings, sequencing can also include explicit psychological and conceptual categorisations as a basis for the practical separation of different registers of valuing.…”

“…However, the results are mixed, as there are indications that interdisciplinary collaboration harbours more publications for researchers (Millar, 2013) and is cited more often (Abramo et al, 2017). Furthermore, the career effects of interdisciplinarity may change as interdisciplinary Master's and PhD programmes are being established and there is a new generation of academics in the making who receive their training within an interdisciplinary or 'undisciplinary' outlook from the very start (Haider et al, 2018 (Cronin, 2008;Miller et al, 2008;Leigh & Brown, 2021). Leigh and Brown (2021) stress the need to examine questions as foundational as what is being researched and what is valued as research, while Miller and colleagues (2008) advocate for outspoken epistemological pluralism in interdisciplinary projects to address these difficulties.…”

“…Furthermore, the career effects of interdisciplinarity may change as interdisciplinary Master's and PhD programmes are being established and there is a new generation of academics in the making who receive their training within an interdisciplinary or 'undisciplinary' outlook from the very start (Haider et al, 2018 (Cronin, 2008;Miller et al, 2008;Leigh & Brown, 2021). Leigh and Brown (2021) stress the need to examine questions as foundational as what is being researched and what is valued as research, while Miller and colleagues (2008) advocate for outspoken epistemological pluralism in interdisciplinary projects to address these difficulties. Other difficulties may include incomplete knowledge of other disciplines, differing culture and values, methodology, and psychology (Bruun et al, 2005) as well as misconceptions and prejudices that researchers from different disciplines may have of one another (Cambell, 2005).…”

“It’s Important to Think of Pepper as a Teaching Aid or Resource External to the Classroom”: A Social Robot in a School for Autistic Children

“…This project was established to approach issues in this field that can lack interdisciplinary perspectives and can be limited by siloed working [12]. As a result, to investigate the potential of a social robot in a school setting for autistic children, we built a team consisting of education, robotics and architecture.…”

“…Fig 12. Perception of the robot; responses are on 5-points Likert scales (labelled from not at all to very much except for Q6: very boring to very entertaining and Q7: very mean to very friendly)…”