跨学科的三维测度——外部知识融合、内在知识会聚与科学合作模式
|
摘要
跨学科是一个复杂、多维的概念,单一的测度方法无法全面描述其本质特征。先前的研究大多针对跨学科某一维度进行分析,缺乏整体视角和系统建构。本研究对跨学科的外部知识融合、内在知识会聚与科学合作模式三个不同维度进行有效分解与整合,分别从参考文献学科多样性、目标文献学科多样性和合作机构学科多样性三个维度进行测度和综合比较分析,以普赖斯奖获得者的研究论文为例,探索不同测度方法的共性与差异、适应性与结合点,以及跨学科研究不同维度之间的内在关联。与单一维度的方法相比,三维测度可以更加全面地剖析研究对象的跨学科特征,同时也为跨学科的测度研究提供了新思路。
Interdisciplinarity is a complex and multidimensional concept,so it is difficult to fully describe its' essential characteristics by a single indicator. Most previous studies have analyzed interdisciplinarity from single dimension,lacking an overall and systematic perspective. In this paper,we decompose,and then integrate the external knowledge integration,internal knowledge convergence and research activity patterns of interdisciplinarity from three different dimensions. Based on publication data of the winners of Derek de Solla Price,a comparative analysis of category integration,knowledge convergence and scientific cooperation are conducted,to explore the differences,adaptabiliies,relations and possible combinations of the three different measurement methods. Compared with the single indicator,our measurement from three dimensions can better profile the interdisciplinary characteristics of research objects. Such a comprehensive dimension also provides a new perspective of evaluating interdisciplinary research.
Interdisciplinarity is a complex and multidimensional concept,so it is difficult to fully describe its' essential characteristics by a single indicator. Most previous studies have analyzed interdisciplinarity from single dimension,lacking an overall and systematic perspective. In this paper,we decompose,and then integrate the external knowledge integration,internal knowledge convergence and research activity patterns of interdisciplinarity from three different dimensions. Based on publication data of the winners of Derek de Solla Price,a comparative analysis of category integration,knowledge convergence and scientific cooperation are conducted,to explore the differences,adaptabiliies,relations and possible combinations of the three different measurement methods. Compared with the single indicator,our measurement from three dimensions can better profile the interdisciplinary characteristics of research objects. Such a comprehensive dimension also provides a new perspective of evaluating interdisciplinary research.
引文
[1]刘仲林,赵晓春.跨学科研究:科学原创性成果的动力之源---以百年诺贝尔生理学和医学奖获奖成果为例[J].科学技术与辩证法,2005,22(6):107-111.
[2]郝凤霞,张春美.原创性思维的源泉---百年诺贝尔奖获奖者知识交叉背景研究[J].自然辩证法研究,2001,17(9):55-59.
[3]刘小宝,刘仲林.跨学科研究前沿理论动态:学术背景和理论焦点[J].浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版),2012,42(6):16-26.
[4]刘仲林.交叉科学时代的交叉研究[J].科学学研究,1993,11(2):11-18,4.
[5]张琳.国内外“交叉科学”研究现状及评述[J].科技管理研究,2013,33(12):251-254.
[6]Morillo F,Bordons M,Gomez I.Interdisciplinarity in science:A tentative typology of disciplines and research areas[J].Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,2003,54(13):1237-1249.
[7]Porter A L,Chubin D E.An indicator of cross-disciplinary research[J].Scientometrics,1985,8(3-4):161-176.
[8]Van Den Besselaar P,Leydesdorff L.Mapping change in scientific specialties:A scientometric reconstruction of the development of artificial intelligence[J].Journal of the American Society for Information Science,1996,47(6):415-436.
[9]Porter A L,Cohen A S,Roessner J D,et al.Measuring researcher interdisciplinarity[J].Scientometrics,2007,72(1):117-147.
[10]Rafols I,Meyer M.Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity:Case studies in bionanoscience[J].Scientometrics,2010,82(2):263-287.
[11]Carley S,Porter A L.A forward diversity index[J].Scientometrics,2012,90(2):407-427.
[12]刘仲林.跨学科学导论[M].杭州:浙江教育出版社,1990.
[13]邱均平,何文静.基于Lotka-Volterra模型的跨学科评价研究[J].大学图书馆学报,2015,33(5):20-25.
[14]王志楠,汪雪锋,黄颖,等.高被引学者论文跨学科特征分析---以经济与商业领域为例[J].科学学研究,2016,34(6):807-813.
[15]杨良斌,周秋菊,金碧辉.基于文献计量的跨学科测度及实证研究[J].图书情报工作,2009,53(10):87-90,115.
[16]杨良斌,金碧辉.跨学科测度指标体系的构建研究[J].情报杂志,2009,28(7):65-69.
[17]许海云,刘春江,雷炳旭,等.学科交叉的测度、可视化研究及应用---一个情报学文献计量研究案例[J].图书情报工作,2014,58(12):95-101.
[18]和晋飞,房俊民.一个跨学科性测度指标:作者专业度[J].情报理论与实践,2015,38(5):42-45,41.
[19]National Academy of Sciences,National Academy of Engineering,Institute of Medicine.Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research[M].Washington,DC:The National Academies Press,2005.
[20]Porter A L,Roessner J D,Cohen A S,et al.Interdisciplinary research:Meaning,metrics and nurture[J].Research Evaluation,2006,15(3):187-195.
[21]Stirling A.A general framework for analysing diversity in science,technology and society[J].Journal of the Royal Society Interface,2007,4(15):707-719.
[22]Leydesdorff L,Rafols I.Indicators of the interdisciplinarity of journals:Diversity,centrality,and citations[J].Journal of Informetrics,2011,5(1):87-100.
[23]Zhou Q J,Rousseau R,Yang L Y,et al.A general framework for describing diversity within systems and similarity between systems with applications in informetrics[J].Scientometrics,2012,93(3):787-812.
[24]Zhang L,Rousseau R,Glnzel W.Diversity of references as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of journals:Taking similarity between subject fields into account[J].Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,2016,67(5):1257-1265.
[25]Cassi L,Champeimont R,Mescheba W,et al.Analysing institutions interdisciplinarity by extensive use of Rao-Stirling diversity index[J].Plos One,2017,12(1):e0170296.
[26]Marx W,Bornmann L.Change of perspective:Bibliometrics from the point of view of cited references-A literature overview on approaches to the evaluation of cited references in bibliometrics[J].Scientometrics,2016,109(2):1397-1415.
[27]Leydesdorff L,Bornmann L,Zhou P.Construction of a pragmatic base line for journal classifications and maps based on aggregated journal-journal citation relations[J].Journal of Informetrics,2016,10(4):902-918.
[28]Wang J,Thijs B,Glanzel W.Interdisciplinarity and impact:Distinct effects of variety,balance,and disparity[J].Plos One,2015,10(5):e0127298.
[29]黄颖,高天舒,王志楠,等.基于Web of Science分类的跨学科测度研究[J].科研管理,2016,37(3):124-132.
[30]Wang L L,Notten A,Surpatean A.Interdisciplinarity of nano research fields:A keyword mining approach[J].Scientometrics,2013,94(3):877-892.
[31]魏建香,孙越泓,苏新宁.基于聚类分析的学科交叉研究[J].情报学报,2010,29(6):1066-1073.
[32]魏建香,孙越泓,苏新宁.学科交叉知识挖掘模型研究[J].情报理论与实践,2012,35(4):76-80.
[33]章成志,徐庶睿,卢超.利用引文内容监测多学科交叉现象的方法与实证[J].图书情报工作,2016,60(19):108-115.
[34]Porter A L,Roessner J D,Heberger A E.How interdisciplinary is a given body of research?[J].Research E-valuation,2008,17(4):273-282.
[35]Klein J T.The discourse of interdisciplinarity[J].Liberal Education,1998,84(3):23-25.
[36]Glanzel W,Schubert A.A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes[J].Scientometrics,2003,56(3):357-367.
(1)中国科学引文数据库(Chinese Science Citation Database,简称CSCD)虽然实现了单篇文章的学科分类,但由于其收录文献的局限性,在实际的跨学科研究中的应用还十分有限。
(2)需要指出的是,在计算参考文献和目标文献的跨学科程度时是采用252个Web of Science学科分类,而计算合作机构的跨学科程度时是采用13个大学科类,这也是合作机构的学科多样性相对较低的主要原因之一。
[2]郝凤霞,张春美.原创性思维的源泉---百年诺贝尔奖获奖者知识交叉背景研究[J].自然辩证法研究,2001,17(9):55-59.
[3]刘小宝,刘仲林.跨学科研究前沿理论动态:学术背景和理论焦点[J].浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版),2012,42(6):16-26.
[4]刘仲林.交叉科学时代的交叉研究[J].科学学研究,1993,11(2):11-18,4.
[5]张琳.国内外“交叉科学”研究现状及评述[J].科技管理研究,2013,33(12):251-254.
[6]Morillo F,Bordons M,Gomez I.Interdisciplinarity in science:A tentative typology of disciplines and research areas[J].Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,2003,54(13):1237-1249.
[7]Porter A L,Chubin D E.An indicator of cross-disciplinary research[J].Scientometrics,1985,8(3-4):161-176.
[8]Van Den Besselaar P,Leydesdorff L.Mapping change in scientific specialties:A scientometric reconstruction of the development of artificial intelligence[J].Journal of the American Society for Information Science,1996,47(6):415-436.
[9]Porter A L,Cohen A S,Roessner J D,et al.Measuring researcher interdisciplinarity[J].Scientometrics,2007,72(1):117-147.
[10]Rafols I,Meyer M.Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity:Case studies in bionanoscience[J].Scientometrics,2010,82(2):263-287.
[11]Carley S,Porter A L.A forward diversity index[J].Scientometrics,2012,90(2):407-427.
[12]刘仲林.跨学科学导论[M].杭州:浙江教育出版社,1990.
[13]邱均平,何文静.基于Lotka-Volterra模型的跨学科评价研究[J].大学图书馆学报,2015,33(5):20-25.
[14]王志楠,汪雪锋,黄颖,等.高被引学者论文跨学科特征分析---以经济与商业领域为例[J].科学学研究,2016,34(6):807-813.
[15]杨良斌,周秋菊,金碧辉.基于文献计量的跨学科测度及实证研究[J].图书情报工作,2009,53(10):87-90,115.
[16]杨良斌,金碧辉.跨学科测度指标体系的构建研究[J].情报杂志,2009,28(7):65-69.
[17]许海云,刘春江,雷炳旭,等.学科交叉的测度、可视化研究及应用---一个情报学文献计量研究案例[J].图书情报工作,2014,58(12):95-101.
[18]和晋飞,房俊民.一个跨学科性测度指标:作者专业度[J].情报理论与实践,2015,38(5):42-45,41.
[19]National Academy of Sciences,National Academy of Engineering,Institute of Medicine.Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research[M].Washington,DC:The National Academies Press,2005.
[20]Porter A L,Roessner J D,Cohen A S,et al.Interdisciplinary research:Meaning,metrics and nurture[J].Research Evaluation,2006,15(3):187-195.
[21]Stirling A.A general framework for analysing diversity in science,technology and society[J].Journal of the Royal Society Interface,2007,4(15):707-719.
[22]Leydesdorff L,Rafols I.Indicators of the interdisciplinarity of journals:Diversity,centrality,and citations[J].Journal of Informetrics,2011,5(1):87-100.
[23]Zhou Q J,Rousseau R,Yang L Y,et al.A general framework for describing diversity within systems and similarity between systems with applications in informetrics[J].Scientometrics,2012,93(3):787-812.
[24]Zhang L,Rousseau R,Glnzel W.Diversity of references as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of journals:Taking similarity between subject fields into account[J].Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,2016,67(5):1257-1265.
[25]Cassi L,Champeimont R,Mescheba W,et al.Analysing institutions interdisciplinarity by extensive use of Rao-Stirling diversity index[J].Plos One,2017,12(1):e0170296.
[26]Marx W,Bornmann L.Change of perspective:Bibliometrics from the point of view of cited references-A literature overview on approaches to the evaluation of cited references in bibliometrics[J].Scientometrics,2016,109(2):1397-1415.
[27]Leydesdorff L,Bornmann L,Zhou P.Construction of a pragmatic base line for journal classifications and maps based on aggregated journal-journal citation relations[J].Journal of Informetrics,2016,10(4):902-918.
[28]Wang J,Thijs B,Glanzel W.Interdisciplinarity and impact:Distinct effects of variety,balance,and disparity[J].Plos One,2015,10(5):e0127298.
[29]黄颖,高天舒,王志楠,等.基于Web of Science分类的跨学科测度研究[J].科研管理,2016,37(3):124-132.
[30]Wang L L,Notten A,Surpatean A.Interdisciplinarity of nano research fields:A keyword mining approach[J].Scientometrics,2013,94(3):877-892.
[31]魏建香,孙越泓,苏新宁.基于聚类分析的学科交叉研究[J].情报学报,2010,29(6):1066-1073.
[32]魏建香,孙越泓,苏新宁.学科交叉知识挖掘模型研究[J].情报理论与实践,2012,35(4):76-80.
[33]章成志,徐庶睿,卢超.利用引文内容监测多学科交叉现象的方法与实证[J].图书情报工作,2016,60(19):108-115.
[34]Porter A L,Roessner J D,Heberger A E.How interdisciplinary is a given body of research?[J].Research E-valuation,2008,17(4):273-282.
[35]Klein J T.The discourse of interdisciplinarity[J].Liberal Education,1998,84(3):23-25.
[36]Glanzel W,Schubert A.A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes[J].Scientometrics,2003,56(3):357-367.
(1)中国科学引文数据库(Chinese Science Citation Database,简称CSCD)虽然实现了单篇文章的学科分类,但由于其收录文献的局限性,在实际的跨学科研究中的应用还十分有限。
(2)需要指出的是,在计算参考文献和目标文献的跨学科程度时是采用252个Web of Science学科分类,而计算合作机构的跨学科程度时是采用13个大学科类,这也是合作机构的学科多样性相对较低的主要原因之一。