Analysis of Cross-Disciplinary Research Through Bibliometric Tools

  • María Bordons
  • Fernanda Morillo
  • Isabel Gómez


A review of interdisciplinarity in science is presented from the point of view of quantitative studies of science. The main objectives pursued and methodologies used in publications on cross-disciplinary research are pointed out, as well as the most relevant results obtained. The study of cross-disciplinary collaboration between authors, co-classification analysis, interdisciplinary nature of publication journals and cross-disciplinary references and/or citations are the most useful approaches to the topic. Results about a global analysis of scientific areas and disciplines based on ISI multi-assignation indicators are presented.


Interdisciplinary Research Publication Journal Bibliometric Indicator Interdisciplinary Collaboration Interdisciplinary Nature 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bordons, M., Barrigón, S. (1992). Bibliometric analysis of publications of Spanish pharmacologists in the SCI (1984–89). II. Contribution to subfields other than ‘Pharmacology & Pharmacy’ (ISI). Scientometrics, 25, 425–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bordons, M., Zulueta, M.A., Romero, F., Barrigón, S. (1999). Measuring interdisciplinary collaboration within a University: the effects of the Multidisciplinary Research Programme. Scientometrics, 46, 383–398.Google Scholar
  3. Bourke, P., Butler, L. (1998). Institutions and the map of science: matching University departments and fields of research. Research Policy, 26, 711–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Braun, T., Schubert, A. (2003) A quantitative view on the coming of age of interdisciplinarity in the sciences 1980–1999. Scientometrics, 58, 183–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cronin, B., Person, S. (1990). The export of ideas from information science. Journal of Information Science, 16, 381–391.Google Scholar
  6. Franklin, M.N. (1988). The community of science in Europe. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.Google Scholar
  7. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Glänzel, W., Schubert, A., Czerwon, H.J. (1999). An item-by-item subject classification of papers published in multidisciplinary and general journals using reference analysis. Scientometrics, 44, 427–439.Google Scholar
  9. Grigg, L. (1999). Cross-disciplinary research. A discussion paper. Commissioned Report No.61. Canberra: Australian Research Council.Google Scholar
  10. Hargens, L.L. (1986). Migration patterns of U.S. Ph.D.s among disciplines and Specialties. Scientometrics, 9, 145–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hinze, S. (1999). Collaboration and cross-disciplinarity in autoimmune diseases. Scientometrics, 46, 457–471.Google Scholar
  12. Katz, S., Hicks, D. (1995). The classification of interdisciplinary journals: a new approach. In M.E.D. Koenig, A. Bookstein (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Biennial Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics (pp. 245–254). Medford: Learned Information.Google Scholar
  13. Klein, J.T. (1996). Interdisciplinary needs: the current context. Library Trends, 45, 134–154.Google Scholar
  14. Le Pair, C. (1980). Switching between academic disciplines in universities in the Netherlands. Scientometrics, 2, 177–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. McCain, K.W. (1995). The structure of biotechnology R&D. Scientometrics, 32, 153–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Metzger, N., Zare, R.N. (1999). Interdisciplinary research: from belief to reality. Science, 283, 642–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Morillo, F., Bordons, M., Gómez, I. (2001). An approach to interdisciplinarity through bibliometric indicators. Scientometrics, 51, 203–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Morillo, F., Bordons, M., Gómez, I. (2003). Interdisciplinarity in science: a tentative typology of disciplines and research areas. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54, 1237–1249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. National Science Board (2000). Science and Engineering Indicators 2000. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation, (NSB-00-1).Google Scholar
  20. Narin, F., Carpenter, M., Berlt, N.C. (1972). Interrelationships of scientific journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 23, 323–331.Google Scholar
  21. Narin, F., Hamilton, K.S., Olivastro, D. (1997). The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science. Research Policy, 26, 317–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Noma, E. (1986). Subject classification and influence weights for 3,000 journals. Report under Contract No. NIH-N01-OD-5-2118. New Jersey: CHI Research, Inc. (updated in 1999).Google Scholar
  23. OECD (1998). Interdisciplinarity in Science and Technology. Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  24. Pierce, S.J. (1999). Boundary crossing in research literatures as a measure of interdisciplinary information transfer. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50, 271–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Porter, A.L., Chubin, D.E. (1985). An indicator of cross-disciplinary research. Scientometrics, 8, 161–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Qin, J., Lancaster, F.W., Allen, B. (1997). Types and levels of collaboration in interdisciplinary research in the sciences. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48, 893–916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Qiu, L. (1992). A study of interdisciplinary research collaboration. Research Evaluation, 2, 169–175.Google Scholar
  28. Rinia, E.J., Van Leeuwen, T.N., Bruins, E.E.W., Van Vuren, H.G., Van Raan, A.F.J. (2002). Measuring knowledge transfer between fields of science. Scientometrics, 54, 347–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sanz, L., Bordons, M., Zulueta, M.A. (2001). Interdisciplinarity as a multidimensional concept: its measure in three different research areas. Research Evaluation, 10, 47–58.Google Scholar
  30. Schmoch, U., Breiner, S., Cuhls, K., Hinze, S., Münt, G. (1994). Interdisciplinary cooperation of research teams in science-intensive areas of technology. Final report to the Commission of the European Unit (VALUE II, Interface II, HS1). Karlsruhe: Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research.Google Scholar
  31. Small, H. (1999). A passage through science: crossing disciplinary boundaries. Library Trends, 48, 72–108.Google Scholar
  32. Small, H., Griffith, B.C. (1974). The structure of scientific literatures. I. Identifying and graphing specialties. Science Studies, 4, 17–40.Google Scholar
  33. Song, C.H. (2003). Interdisciplinarity ad knowledge inflow/outflow structure among science and engineering research in Korea. Scientometrics, 58, 129–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Steele, T.W., Stier, J.C. (2000). The impact of interdisciplinary research in the environmental sciences: a forestry case study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51, 476–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tijssen, R.J.W. (1992). A quantitative assessment of interdisciplinary structures in science and technology: co-classification analysis of energy research. Research Policy, 22, 27–44.Google Scholar
  36. Tomov, D.T., Mutafov, H.G. (1996). Comparative indicators of interdisciplinary in modern science. Scientometrics, 37, 267–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Urata, H. (1990). Information flows among academic disciplines in Japan. Scientometrics, 18, 309–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Van der Besselaar, P., Heimeriks, G. (2001). Disciplinary, multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary. Concepts and indicators. In M. Davis and C.S. Wilson (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics (pp. 705–716). Sydney: University of New South Wales.Google Scholar
  39. Van Leeuwen, T., Tijssen, R. (2000). Interdisciplinary dynamics of modern science: analysis of cross-disciplinary citation flows. Research Evaluation, 9, 183–187.Google Scholar
  40. Weingart, P., Stehr, N. (Eds.). (1999). Practising interdisciplinarity. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • María Bordons
    • 1
  • Fernanda Morillo
    • 1
  • Isabel Gómez
    • 1
  1. 1.Centro de Información y Documentación Científica (CINDOC)Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)MadridSpain

Personalised recommendations