This study contributes to the recent discussions on indicating interdisciplinarity, i.e., going beyond mere metrics of interdisciplinarity. We propose a multi-dimensional and contextual framework to improve the granularity and usability of the existing methodology for quantifying the interdisciplinary knowledge flow (IKF) in which scientific disciplines import and export knowledge from/to other disciplines. To characterize the knowledge exchange between disciplines, we recognize three dimensions under this framework, namely, broadness, intensity, and heterogeneity. We show that each dimension covers a different aspect of IKF, especially between disciplines with the largest volume of IKF, and can assist in uncovering different types of interdisciplinarity. We apply this framework in two use cases, one at the level of disciplines and one at the level of journals, to show how it can offer a more holistic and detailed viewpoint on the interdisciplinarity of scientific entities than plain citation counts. We further compare our proposed framework, an indicating process, with established indicators and discuss how such information tools on interdisciplinarity can assist science policy practices such as performance-based research funding systems and panel-based peer review processes.
翻译:这项研究有助于最近关于显示不同知识流动的讨论,即超越仅仅衡量不同知识差异的尺度。我们提议了一个多维和背景框架,以改进现有方法的颗粒性和实用性,以量化跨学科知识流(IKF),科学学科从其他学科/从其他学科输入和输出知识。为了说明学科间知识交流的特点,我们认识到这一框架下的三个层面,即广泛性、强度和异质性。我们表明,每个层面都涵盖国际知识论坛的不同方面,特别是拥有最大数量国际知识论坛的学科之间的不同方面,可以帮助发现不同类型不同差异性。我们将这一框架应用于两种情况,一种是在学科一级,另一种是在期刊一级,以表明科学实体与简单引用数相比的相互差异性,如何提供更全面和详细的观点。我们进一步比较了我们提议的框架,指明了进程,并讨论了关于不同性的信息工具如何协助科学政策实践,例如基于业绩的研究供资系统和小组。