Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the structure, patterns and themes of interdisciplinary collaborations in the digital humanities (DH) research through the application of social network analysis and visualization tools.

The sample includes articles containing DH research in the Web of Science Core Collection as of December 2018. First, co-occurrence data representing collaborations among disciplinary were extracted from the subject category. Second, the descriptive statistics, network indicators and interdisciplinary communities were calculated. Third, the research topics of different interdisciplinary collaboration communities based on system keywords, author keywords, title and abstracts were detected.

The findings reveal that while the scope of disciplines involved in DH research is broad and evolving over time, most interdisciplinary collaborations are concentrated among several disciplines, including computer science, library and information science, linguistics and literature. The study further uncovers some communities based on closely collaborating disciplines and the evolving nature of such interdisciplinary collaboration communities over time. To better understand the close collaboration ties, the study traces and analyzes the research topics and themes of the interdisciplinary communities. Finally, the implications of the findings for DH research are discussed.

This study applied various informetric methods and tools to reveal the collaboration structure, patterns and themes among disciplinaries in DH research.

The present study examined the role of voice in facilitating interdisciplinary collaboration. According to the group-value model of procedural justice, voice relates to interpersonal relationships among coworkers because it facilitates a greater interest in helping the group (e.g. group-serving behavior). We argue that because of the relationship between voice and one type of group-serving behavior--advice sharing--that greater perceptions of voice would also predict more collaboration. In a field study examining collaborative social networks among university researchers, we found that greater perceptions of voice positively related to both degree of advice sharing and collaboration. Moreover, the extent to which individuals shared advice fully mediated the relationship between perceived voice and collaboration. Implications for voice and collaboration are discussed.

The purpose of this study was to use Watkins and Marsick model of a learning organization (1993, 1996), the dimensions of the learning organization questionnaire as a framework for interdisciplinary network collaboration and knowledge sharing.

The research team used a mixed-methods approach for data collection. Survey data was collected from 181 networks. In addition, data was collected from two focus groups with six participants each.

Results, in general, showed that the learning organization culture could be used as a framework for interdisciplinary network collaboration. In particular, results showed that shared vision, imbedded systems and knowledge sharing were key driving forces required for successful collaboration.

Theoretical and practical implications were discussed, and conditions for learning organization culture for networks were established.

People in a network era need more than training; they need ongoing, interdisciplinary, collaborative support to solve complex problems. Organizations can only work effectively if barriers to organizational learning were removed. This originality of this paper lies in applying learning organization framework at the network level.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the development and experience of the Mental Health Professionals’ Network (MHPN) in building and supporting a national interdisciplinary professional development platform in community mental health to enhance practitioner response to the needs of consumers.

The key components of the MHPN model are described highlighting effective ways of engaging practitioners and supporting interdisciplinary practice. The MHPN has two key programs – Face-to-Face Interdisciplinary Practitioner Networks and an Online Professional Development Program.

The MHPN model has had significant uptake in communities across Australia and continues to grow. Practitioners report positive outcomes in engaging with other practitioners, improving their professional knowledge and having gained increased confidence in the provision of mental health care to patients.

The progress and learnings to date offer some useful insights that can be applied to other settings to support integrated care for patients with mental health problems through enhancing collaborative care among practitioners at the primary care level.

MHPN is a unique, national, successful platform delivering opportunities for interdisciplinary professional development in the primary mental health sector. The model is cost effective, practitioner driven, and transferable to other settings.

The purpose of this research is to investigate the interdisciplinary relations in some high‐priority fields of science and technology based on ISI data.

This is an applied study using scientometric, citation analysis and network analysis methods. The study population consists of scientific articles of Iranian researchers in five fields that have been indexed in “WOS” database. These fields are included nanotechnology, biophysics, nuclear physics, sociology and communication. After identifying and extracting data from “WOS” (included 1,777 records), in order to determine the interdisciplinary relations and the evolution of these relationships, the citations of these records (41,080 citations) have been extracted and analysed.

The results indicate all the studied scientific fields have self‐citation and other‐citation. Depending on the type of field, the rate of intra‐disciplinary and extra‐disciplinary citations is various. There is a positive correlation between co‐authorship and interdisciplinary approach in all the studied fields. There is no significant relation between the number of citations and interdisciplinary approach. Overall, the results showed the use of only a bibliographic method cannot specify all aspects of interdisciplinarity of the scientific field. Simultaneous use of different analysis methods such as citation analysis, co‐authorship analysis and bibliographic coupling is necessary in order to data exchange between fields.

The analysis and mapping of interdisciplinary relations in a scientific field can provide useful information regarding connectivity and interdependence among areas. Through such studies, the status of cooperation between disciplines and the evolutionary trend of it is well defined. The results of these studies would also be useful in developing the interdisciplinary collaboration among professionals and understanding their information needs and plan to meet these needs.

Despite the proven importance of co-design as a way of improving the social relevance of architecture, there is a lack of opportunity for meaningful co-design processes in the current professional Master of Architecture programme in South Africa as it is largely modelled on the professional work stages of the South African Council for the Architecture Profession (SACAP), which are based on the assumption of primary authorship and authority of the architect.

This problem has been investigated by way of ten workshops with high school learners in the Mamelodi East township in South Africa, as part of a professional master’s degree in architecture.

The findings of the workshops indicate that the initial stages of design could benefit directly from the participation processes and could be critiqued constructively. However, increased resistance to the process by crit panels was experienced once the sketch design phase was completed and the expectation of primary authorship increased. Engagement of the learners in the latter part of the design decision-making process also diminished as levels of experience in spatial design became evidently further removed from the expected outcomes.

In terms of co-design discourse and the evident value of participatory skills in practice, it is evident that the initial work stages of concept, brief and ideation are fairly easily assimilated into the pedagogical requirements of the degree programme and as such could enable a more socially relevant and responsive approach to professional practice.

The South African standard of practising architecture leaves little space for the process of co-design, even within the educational environment. The value of co-design within this context lies predominantly in the values and conversations generated rather than the aesthetics of the end product. The process of co-design opens up the opportunity for new dialogues to emerge and for relationships to form.

Co-design illustrates how architectural intelligence can be exercised in a much broader spatial field that acknowledges more than just the building itself but social, global, ecological and virtual networks, thereby changing how the authors design, what the authors design and who designs it.

It is in the realm of co-design that the beauty of architecture oscillates between strangeness and the ordinary. If the authors embrace the power of the collective and collaborative thinking, the authors are able to conceive new ways in the making of architecture. In order to arrive at this, however, the straightjacketed approach of modelling the master’s programme on professional work stages and outcomes needs to be challenged so that true transformation of the profession can be enabled through its pedagogical instruments.

Based upon the argument that the primary characteristic of successful interdisciplinary research lies in human behavior and action (Brun et al., 2007 as cited in Buller, 2008), the purpose of this paper is to offer a view on human aspects of interdisciplinary research.

The paper presents interdisciplinary research as an overlapping process of collective human interactions, consisting of group composition, conceptualization, integration and contribution. Conceptualization and integration processes are particularly important for knowledge exchange and creation as individuals learn to translate, articulate, relate and relocate their original disciplinary positions (Buller, 2008). Further, the paper argues that interdisciplinarity can be enhanced through appropriate group mechanisms and practices; and successful interdisciplinary research also translates into individual (and group) learning and capability development, in addition to knowledge creation.

Interdisciplinary research is important for IB scholars to stay relevant in today's complex environment (Cheng et al., 2009). Since the South Asian region represents extreme contrast and paradoxes, interdisciplinary research could prove particularly valuable in exploring contradictions there (Khilji, 2012).

The value of this perspective is in describing interdisciplinary research as a boundary-spanning experience for researchers in that it facilitates creation of new insights and allows them to transcend their original discipline. However, interdisciplinarity itself is not automatic, but must be collectively managed through appropriate group mechanisms and practices (Buller, 2008; Haythornthwaite, 2006).

The purpose of this paper is to analyse and describe the learning that takes place in the interaction between academics from different disciplines and perspectives in collaboration with practitioners.

The research draws on theories of learning that view it in relation to context, where the most significant features of the learning process concern discerning new aspects of a phenomenon. The study focuses on the workplace learning of researchers in a multidisciplinary programme at the National Institute for Working Life in Sweden (NIWL). Data was collected from semi‐structured interviews. In the analysis the learning experienced was discerned by identifying how the participants spoke of developing and changing in their work as researchers.

The investigation identified five categories of learning of the academics in the multidisciplinary research programme, namely: deepened awareness of perspectives and concepts; practical development; new awareness of one's competences and professional learning process; flexible professionalism and practical usefulness; insights into research and development processes.

The study contributes to an increased understanding of how knowledge production and academics' workplace learning is constituted in multidisciplinary contexts and research programmes involving practitioners from outside academia.

In organising and supporting learning and knowledge exchange in inter‐ or multidisciplinary research programmes with (or without) practitioners, it is essential to be aware of the importance of relational and contextual implications for academics' learning processes.

Team learning is critical to interdisciplinary research teams (IDR teams) to use heterogeneous knowledge effectively. Nevertheless, team learning is rarely addressed in the IDR team literature. Also, few studies investigate the antecedents and consequences of team learning in IDR teams, leading to a lack of guidance for management practices. This study aims to investigate how team learning can be developed and how team learning influences team outcomes in IDR teams.

A questionnaire survey on 304 members of 37 IDR teams in a research university in China is conducted. Data are analyzed using a partial least square structural equation modeling.

The results support most hypotheses in general. For the antecedent variables, task interdependence, trust and constructive conflict positively affect team learning. For the outcome variables, team learning improves shared mental models, coordination quality and team performance significantly. Additionally, task uncertainty positively moderates the team learning-coordination quality relation and team learning-team performance relation. However, this paper does not find support for the moderating role of task uncertainty on the team learning-shared mental models relation.

To the best of the knowledge, this is the first study investigating the antecedents and consequences of team learning in IDR teams. A multidimensional measurement of team learning for the IDR team context is developed. This study investigates how team behavioral factors influence team learning and the effect of team learning on shared mental models, coordination quality and team performance. This study also explores the contingency role of task uncertainty in the effects of team learning.

This chapter focuses on learning networks. The authors describe the six facets of knowledge networks for learning contexts. The importance of three facets is called out, including geography, topology, and nodes. The authors provide four networks, including pedagogy networks – that is, teachers, certification and professional learning networks, school networks, and informal and collaborative learning networks.