Interdisciplinary research has emerged as a hotbed for innovation and discoveries. The increasing dominance of grant-supported research, combined with growing interest in funding interdisciplinary work, raises fundamental questions on the role of interdisciplinary grants in supporting high-impact interdisciplinary advances. Here we develop a measurement framework to quantify the interdisciplinarity of both research grants and publications and apply it to 350K grants from 164 funding agencies over 26 countries and 1.3M papers that acknowledged the support of these grants from 1985 to 2009. Our analysis uncovers two contradictory patterns. On the one hand, interdisciplinary grants tend to produce interdisciplinary papers and interdisciplinary papers are associated with high impact. On the other hand, compared to their disciplinary counterparts, interdisciplinary grants produce much fewer papers and interdisciplinary papers that they support have substantially reduced impact. We show that the key to resolving this discrepancy lies in the power of disciplinary grants: Highly interdisciplinary papers supported by deeply disciplinary grants garner disproportionately high impacts from both core disciplines and broader fields. Further, the broad and deep impacts of disciplinary grants are not simply due to funding size, reception of ideas within disciplinary boundaries, or collaborative formats. When it comes to producing key interdisciplinary advances, disciplinary grants appear to do more with less and seem especially powerful when paired with other similar disciplinary grants. Amidst the rapid rise of support for interdisciplinary work across the sciences, these results highlight the underexplored role of disciplinary grants in driving crucial interdisciplinary advances, suggesting that interdisciplinary research is a risky endeavor and requires deep disciplinary expertise and investments.
翻译:跨学科研究已成为创新和发现的热bed。 随着越来越多的基金会愿意支持跨学科工作,加上基金支持的研究日益占主导地位,引发了关于跨学科基金在支持高影响力跨学科进展方面作用的根本性问题。 在此,我们开发了一个测量框架,以量化研究基金和出版物的跨学科性,并将其应用于来自164个资助机构的26个国家的350K个基金会和1985年至2009年承认这些基金会支持的约1.3M篇论文。 我们的分析揭示了两种矛盾的模式。 一方面,跨学科基金往往产生跨学科论文,并且跨学科论文与高影响力相关联。 另一方面,与专业基金相比,跨学科基金产生的论文数量要少得多,它们所支持的跨学科论文的影响力也大大降低。 我们展示了解决这一矛盾的关键在于专业基金的力量:由专业基金大力支持的高度跨学科论文,从核心学科和更广泛的领域中获得了不成比例的高影响力。 此外,专业基金的广泛和深远影响不仅仅取决于资金规模、学科范围内的想法接受或合作形式。 当涉及产生关键跨学科进展时,专业基金似乎可以更少地取得更多成果,并且在与其他类似专业基金配对时尤为强大。在科学界对跨学科工作的支持迅速增长之际,这些结果突出了专业基金在推动关键跨学科进展方面的作用尚未深入探讨。 跨学科研究是一项有风险的事业,需要深厚的学科专业知识和大量投资。