Skip to main content

Insights into Phd Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration, Partnership and Competition in Computer Science

  • Chapter
Book cover Collaboration, Communities and Competition

Abstract

Many complex problems demand innovative approaches that combine knowledge from different scientific disciplines (Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering, 2005; Frodeman et al, 2010). Cross-disciplinary research is therefore gaining importance as an intellectual partnership of demarcated domains of specialised inquiry. In order to prepare future generations of scientists to solve complex problems between and beyond the boundaries of single disciplines, efforts are being made to transform doctoral education.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Bammer, G. (2012). Strengthening interdisciplinary research: What it is, what it does, how it does it and how it is supported. The Australian Council of Learned Academies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borrego, M., & Newswander, L. (2008). Characteristics of successful cross-disciplinary engineering education collaboration. Journal of Engineering Education, 97, 123–134. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00962.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruce, A., Lyall, C., Tait, J., & Williams, R. (2004). Interdisciplinary integration in Europe: The case of the Fifth Framework programme. Futures, 36(4), 457–470. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2003.10.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calatrava Moreno, M. C., & Danowitz, M. A. (2016). Becoming an interdisciplinary scientist: An analysis of students’ experiences in three computer science doctoral programs. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 38(4), 448–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calatrava Moreno, M. C., Auzinger, T., & Werthner, H. (2016). On the uncertainty of interdisciplinarity measurements due to incomplete bibliographic data. Scientometrics, 107(1), 213–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, B. C., & Pak, A. W. (2007). Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and transdisciplinarity in health research, services, education and policy: 2. Promotors, barriers, and strategies of enhancement. Clinical and Investigative Medicine, 30(6), E224-32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Domik, G., & Fischer, G. (2011). Coping with complex real-world problems: Strategies for developing the competency of transdisciplinary collaboration. In N. Reynolds, & M. Turcsányi-Szabó (Eds.), Key competencies in the knowledge society (pp. 90–101). New York, USA: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frodeman, R., Klein, J. T., & Mitcham, C. (Eds.). (2010). The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gleed, A., & Marchant, D. (2016). Interdisciplinarity: Survey report for the Global Research Council 2016 annual meeting. Stockport, UK: djs research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golde, C. M., & Gallagher, H. A. (1999). The challenges of conducting interdisciplinary research in traditional doctoral programs. Ecosystems, 281–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graybill, J. K., & Shandas, V. (2010). Doctoral student and early career academic perspectives. In R. Frodeman, J. T. Klein, & C. Mitcham (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (pp. 404–418). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graybill, J. K., Dooling, S., Shandas, V., Witney, J., Greve, A., & Simon, G. L. (2006). A rough guide to interdisciplinarity: Graduate student perspectives. BioScience, 56(9), 757–763. doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2006)56[757:ARGTIG]2.0.CO;2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huutoniemi, K., Klein, J. T., Brunn, H., & Hukkinen, J. (2010). Analysing interdisciplinarity: Typology and indicators. Research Policy, 39, 79–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. (2005). Facilitating interdisciplinary research. Washington, USA: The National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/11153

    Google Scholar 

  • Jahn, T., Bergmann, M., & Keil, F. (2012). Transdisciplinarity: Between mainstreaming and marginalisation. Ecological Economics, 79, 1–10. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.04.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, J. T. (1990). Interdisciplinarity: History, theory and practice. Detroit, USA: Wayne State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyall, C., Bruce, A., & Marsden, W. (2011). Identifying key sucess factors in the quest for interdisciplinary knowledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, C. L. (2010). Information research on interdisciplinarity. In R. Frodeman, J. T. Klein, & C. Mitcham (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (pp. 174–188). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, A. L., & Rafols, I. (2009). Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time. Scientometrics, 81(3), 719–745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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(10), 893–916. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199710)48:10<893::AID-ASI5>3.0.CO;2-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sá, C. M. (2008). ‘Interdisciplinary strategies’ in U.S. research universities. Higher Education, 55(5), 537–552. doi:10.1007/s10734-007-9073-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scaif, M., Curtis, E., & Hill, C. (1994). Interdisciplinary collaboration: A case study of software development for fashion designers. Interacting with Computers, 6, 395–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholle, D. (1995). Resisting disciplines: repositioning media studies in the university. Communication Theory, 5, 130–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stirling, A. (2007). A general framework for analysing diversity in science, technology and society. Journal of The Royal Society Interface, 4, 707–719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Rijnsoever, F. J., & Hessels, L. K. (2011). Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration. Research Policy, 40(3), 463–472. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2010.11.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Sense Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Moreno, M.D.C.C., Danowitz, M.A. (2017). Insights into Phd Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration, Partnership and Competition in Computer Science. In: Dent, S., Lane, L., Strike, T. (eds) Collaboration, Communities and Competition. SensePublishers, Rotterdam. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6351-122-3_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6351-122-3_11

  • Publisher Name: SensePublishers, Rotterdam

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-6351-122-3

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics