Universities’ structural commitment to interdisciplinary research
- 110 Downloads
In recent years, science policy experts have been promoting interdisciplinary research (IDR) in order to foster innovation and address grand scientific challenges. But to date we know little about whether, how, and to what extent universities are committed to fostering this type of research. This paper develops the first measure of university commitment to IDR, which relies on the organizational structuring of research activity into research centers and departments. We extend the previous literature by measuring, rather than assuming, the interdisciplinary nature of research units. Using a large amount of textual data from 157 research universities in the United States, and combining machine learning and confirmatory factor analysis techniques, we develop a continuous and composite measure that taps universities’ structural commitment to IDR. We then examine the commitment exhibited by specific universities and how such commitment varies by university characteristics like size, resources, and region. Results show that the fraction of centers and departments that are interdisciplinary is critical to measuring a university’s structural commitment to IDR and to developing specific research policies aimed at fostering IDR.
KeywordsUniversities Interdisciplinarity Research centers Departments Machine learning
Mathematics Subject Classification28 Measure & Integration 62 Statistics 68 Computer Science
JEL ClassificationC38 Classification Methods Principal Components Factor Models I23 Higher Education Research Institutions
This research was supported by NSF SciSIP Collaborative Grants to Erin Leahey and Sondra Barringer (Award #s 1461989 and 1461846). Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. We are grateful to Steven Brint, Scott Frickel, and Jerry Jacobs for their foundational work, and to Karina Salazar and Esme Middaugh for impeccable research assistance.
- Abbott, A. (1999). Department and discipline: Chicago sociology at one hundred. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Abbott, A. (2001). Chaos of disciplines. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Barringer, S. N. (2016). The changing finances of public higher education organizations: Diversity, change and discontinuity. In E. P. Berman & C. Paradeise (Eds.), Research in the sociology of organizations: The university under pressure (Vol. 46, pp. 223–263). Bingley, United Kingdom: Emerald.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Barringer, S. N., & Slaughter, S. (2016). University trustees and the entrepreneurial university: Inner circles, interlocks, and exchanges. In S. Slaughter & B. J. Taylor (Eds.), Higher education, stratification, and workforce development: Competitive advantage in Europe, the US, and Canada (pp. 151–171). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Birnbaum, P. H. (1981). Inegration and specialization in academic research. Academy of Management, 24(3), 487–503.Google Scholar
- Brint, S. G., Turk-Bicakci, L., Proctor, K., & Murphy, S. P. (2009). Expanding the social frame of knowledge: Interdisciplinary, degree-granting fields in american colleges and universities, 1975–2000. The Review of Higher Education, 32(2), 155–183. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.0.0042.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Coleman, D. L., Spira, A., & Ravid, K. (2013). Promoting interdisciplinary research in departments of medicine: Results from two models at boston university school of medicine. Transactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association, 124, 275–282.Google Scholar
- Downey, G. J., Feinstein, N. W., Kleinman, D. L., Peterson, S., & Fukuda, C. (2016). The frictions of interdisicplinarity: The case of the wisconsin institutes for discovery. In S. Frickel, M. Albert, & B. Prainsack (Eds.), Investigating interdisciplinary collaboration: Theory and practice across disciplines. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
- Duke University. (2017). Interdisciplinary studies at Duke University: Contact us. Retrieved Oct 01, 2018. https://sites.duke.edu/interdisciplinary/about/contacts/.
- Flaherty, C. (2016). Cluster-hiring cluster &%*#?. Inside higher ed news. 1 February 2016. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/02/01/uc-riverside-faculty-survey-suggests-outrage-clusterhiring-initiative. Accessed 10 Jan 2018.
- Frickel, S. (2004). Chemical consequences: Environmental mutagens, scientist activism, and the rise of genetic toxicology. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
- Geiger, R. L. (1990). Organized research units-their role in the development of university research. The Journal of Higher Education, 61(1), 1–19.Google Scholar
- Gumport, P. J., & Snydman, S. K. (2002). The formal organization of knowledge: An analysis of academic structure. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(3), 375–408.Google Scholar
- Harris, M. (2010). Interdisciplinary strategy and collaboration: A case study of american research universities. Journal of Research Administration, XLI, 22–34.Google Scholar
- Harris, M. S., & Holley, K. (2008). Contructing the interdisciplinary ivory tower: The planning of interdisciplinary spaces on university campuses. Planning for Higher Education, 36(3), 34–43.Google Scholar
- Ikenberry, S., & Friedman, R. C. (1972). Beyond academic departments: The story of institutes and centers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Jacobs, J. A. (2013). In defense of disciplines: Interdisciplinarity and specialization in the research university. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Jaschik, S. (2014). $100 million gift for Dartmouth. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved: Oct 01, 2018. https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2014/04/10/100-million-gift-dartmouth.
- Klein, J. T. (1990). Interdisciplinarity: History, theory, and practice. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.Google Scholar
- Leahey, E. (2018). Science policy research report: Infrastructure for interdisciplinarity. National Science Foundation SciSIP Program. Award #1723536.Google Scholar
- Leahey, E., & Blume, A. (2017). Elucidating the process: Why women patent less than men. In A. N. Link (Ed.), Gender and entrepreneurial activity (pp. 151–167). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
- Light, R., & Adams, J. (2017). A dynamic, multidimensional approach to knowledge production. In S. Frickel, M. Albert, & B. Prainsack (Eds.), Investigating interdisciplinary collaboration: Theory and practice across disciplines (pp. 127–147). New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
- Mallon, W. T. (2006). The benefits and challenges of research centers and institutes in academic medicine: Findings from six universities and their medical schools. Research Issues, 81(6), 502–512.Google Scholar
- National Academies of Science, National Academy of Engineering and Institute of Medicine. (2005). Facilitating interdisciplinary research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
- National Research Council. (2014). In C. Sá (Ed.), Convergence: Facilitating transdisciplinary integration of life sciences, physical sciences, engineering, and beyond. Washington, DC: National Research Council.Google Scholar
- Nickelhoff, L., & Nyatepe-Coo, E. (2012). Promoting interdisciplinary research through institutes and centers (Vol. Washington). D.C.: Education Advisory Board.Google Scholar
- Rhoten, D. (2003). A multi-method analysis of the social and technical conditions for interdisciplinary collaboration. San Francisco, CA: The Hybrid Vigor Institute.Google Scholar
- Rhoten, D. (2005). Interdisciplinary research: Trend or transition. Items Issues, 5, 6–11.Google Scholar
- Schummer, J. (2004). Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology. Scientometrics, 59(3), 425–465. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000018542.71314.38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Slaughter, S., Thomas, S. L., Johnson, D. R., & Barringer, S. N. (2014). Institutional conflict of interest: The role of interlocking directorates in the scientific relationships between universities and the corporate sector. The Journal of Higher Education, 85(1), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2014.0000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Staff, C. (2015). Hiring faculty members in groups can improve diversity and campus climate. The chronicle of higher education. 30 April 2015. https://www.chronicle.com/blogs/ticker/hiring-faculty-members-in-groups-canimprove-diversity-and-campus-climate/98149. Accessed 7 Jan 2019.
- Stahler, G. J., & Tash, W. R. (1994). Centers and institutes in the research university: Issues, problems, and prospects. The Journal of Higher Education, 65(5), 540–554.Google Scholar
- Turner, V. K., Benessaiah, K., Warren, S., & Iwaniec, D. (2015). Essential tensions in interdisciplinary scholarship: Navigating challenges in affect, epistemologies, and structure in environment-society research centers. Higher Education, 70(4), 649–665. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9859-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wagner, C. S., Roessner, J. D., Bobb, K., Klein, J. T., Boyack, K. W., Keyton, J., et al. (2011). Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): A review of the literature. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.06.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Weisbrod, B. A., Jeffrey, P. B., & Asch, E. D. (2008). Mission and money: Understanding the university. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar