The evolution of research collaboration within and across disciplines in Italian Academia

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Elisa Bellotti ; Luka Kronegger ; Luigi Guadalupi
• 关键词：Scientific networks ; Cluster analysis ; Interdisciplinary ; Scientific collaborations ; Social network analysis ; Scientometrics
• 刊名：Scientometrics
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：November 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：109
• 期：2
• 页码：783-811
• 全文大小：1,185 KB
• 刊物主题：Information Storage and Retrieval; Library Science; Interdisciplinary Studies;
• 出版者：Springer Netherlands
• ISSN：1588-2861
• 卷排序：109

文摘

In sociology of science much attention is dedicated to the study of scientific networks, especially to co-authorship and citations in publications. Other trends of research have investigated the advantages, limits, performances and difficulties of interdisciplinary research, which is increasingly advocated by the main lines of public research funding. This paper explores the dynamics of interdisciplinary research in Italy over 10 years of scientific collaboration on research projects. Instead of looking at the output of research, i.e. publications, we analyse the original research proposals that have been funded by the Ministry of University and Research for a specific line of funding, the Research Projects of National Interest. In particular, we want to see how much interdisciplinary research has been conducted during the period under analysis and how changes in the overall amount of public funding might have affected disciplinary and interdisciplinary collaboration. We also want to cluster the similarities and differences of the amount of disciplinary and interdisciplinary collaboration across scientific disciplines, and see if it changes over time. Finally, we want to see if interdisciplinary projects receive an increasing share of funding compared to their disciplinary bounded counterparts. Our results indicate that while interdisciplinary research diminishes along the years, potentially responding to the contraction of public funding, research that cut across disciplinary boundaries overall receives more funding than research confined within disciplinary boundaries. Furthermore, the clustering procedure do not indicate clear and stable distinction between disciplines, but similar patterns of disciplinary and interdisciplinary collaboration are shown by discipline with common epistemological frameworks, which share compatible epistemologies of scientific investigations. We conclude by reflecting upon the implications of our findings for research policies and practices and by discussing future research in this area.