Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Evaluating the impact of interdisciplinary research: A multilayer network approach

  • ELISA OMODEI (a1), MANLIO DE DOMENICO (a1) and ALEX ARENAS (a1)
Abstract

Nowadays, scientific challenges usually require approaches that cross traditional boundaries between academic disciplines, driving many researchers towards interdisciplinarity. Despite its obvious importance, there is a lack of studies on how to quantify the influence of interdisciplinarity on the research impact, posing uncertainty in a proper evaluation for hiring and funding purposes. Here, we propose a method based on the analysis of bipartite interconnected multilayer networks of citations and disciplines, to assess scholars, institutions, and countries interdisciplinary importance. Using data about physics publications and US patents, we show that our method allows to reward, using a quantitative approach, scholars and institutions that have carried out interdisciplinary work and have had an impact in different scientific areas. The proposed method could be used by funding agencies, universities and scientific policy decision makers for hiring and funding purposes, and to complement existing methods to rank universities and countries.

    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Evaluating the impact of interdisciplinary research: A multilayer network approach
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Evaluating the impact of interdisciplinary research: A multilayer network approach
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Evaluating the impact of interdisciplinary research: A multilayer network approach
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
References
Hide All
Bergstrom, C. (2007). Measuring the value and prestige of scholarly journals. College & Research Libraries News, 68 (5), 314316.
Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., & Daniel, H.-D. (2008). Are there better indices for evaluation purposes than the h index? a comparison of nine different variants of the h index using data from biomedicine. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59 (5), 830837.
Brin, S., & Page, L. (1998). The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual web search engine. Computer Networks and isdn Systems, 30 (1), 107117.
De Domenico, M., Solé-Ribalta, A., Cozzo, E., Kivelä, M., Moreno, Y., Porter, M. A.,. . .Arenas, A. (2013). Mathematical formulation of multilayer networks. Physical Review x, 3 (4), 041022.
De Domenico, M., Solé-Ribalta, A., Omodei, E., Gómez, S., & Arenas, A. (2015). Ranking in interconnected multilayer networks reveals versatile nodes. Nature Communications, 6, 6868.
de Solla Price, D. J. (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149 (3683), 510515.
Deville, P., Wang, D., Sinatra, R., Song, C., Blondel, V. D., & Barabási, A.-L. (2014). Career on the move: Geography, stratification, and scientific impact. Scientific Reports, 4, 4770.
Egghe, L. (2006). Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69 (1), 131152.
Eom, Y. H., Fortunato, S., & Perc, M. (2011). Characterizing and modeling citation dynamics. Plos one, 6 (9), e24926.
Garfield, E., & Merton, R. K. (1979). Citation indexing: Its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities Vol. 8. New York: Wiley.
Gauffriau, M., Larsen, P., Maye, I., Roulin-Perriard, A., & von Ins, M. (2008). Comparisons of results of publication counting using different methods. Scientometrics, 77 (1), 147176.
Glänzel, W., Debackere, K., Thijs, B., & Schubert, A. (2006). A concise review on the role of author self-citations in information science, bibliometrics and science policy. Scientometrics, 67 (2), 263277.
Guimera, R., Uzzi, B., Spiro, J., & Amaral, L. A. N. (2005). Team assembly mechanisms determine collaboration network structure and team performance. Science, 308 (5722), 697702.
Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (2001). The nber patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools. Tech. rept. National Bureau of Economic Research.
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102 (46), 1656916572.
Jensen, P., & Lutkouskaya, K. (2014). The many dimensions of laboratories interdisciplinarity. Scientometrics, 98 (1), 619631.
Kaur, J., Radicchi, F., & Menczer, F. (2013). Universality of scholarly impact metrics. Journal of Informetrics, 7 (4), 924932.
Ke, Q., Ferrara, E., Radicchi, F., & Flammini, A.. (2015). Defining and identifying sleeping beauties in science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112 (24), 74267431.
King, D. A. (2004). The scientific impact of nations. Nature, 430 (6997), 311316.
Kivelä, M., Arenas, A., Barthelemy, M., Gleeson, J. P., Moreno, Y., & Porter, M. A. (2014). Multilayer networks. Journal of Complex Networks, 2 (3), 203271.
Larivière, V., Haustein, S., & Börner, K. (2015). Long-distance interdisciplinarity leads to higher scientific impact. Plos one, 10 (3), e0122565.
Leydesdorff, L. (2007). Betweenness centrality as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of scientific journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58 (9), 13031319.
Li, Y., Radicchi, F., Castellano, C. & Ruiz-Castillo, J. (2013). Quantitative evaluation of alternative field normalization procedures. Journal of Informetrics, 7 (3), 746755.
Nature. (2015). Mind meld. Nature, 525, 289290.
Newman, M. E. J. (2009). The first-mover advantage in scientific publication. Epl (Europhysics Letters), 86 (6), 68001.
Pan, L., & Katrenko, S. (2015). A review of the uks interdisciplinary research using a citation-based approach. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.
Penner, O., Pan, R. K., Petersen, A. M., Kaski, K., & Fortunato, S. (2013). On the predictability of future impact in science. Scientific Reports, 3, 3052.
Porter, A. L., Cohen, A. S., Roessner, J. D., & Perreault, M. (2007). Measuring researcher interdisciplinarity. Scientometrics, 72 (1), 117147.
Radicchi, F., Fortunato, S., & Castellano, C. (2008). Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105 (45), 1726817272.
Radicchi, F., Fortunato, S., Markines, B., & Vespignani, A. (2009). Diffusion of scientific credits and the ranking of scientists. Physical Review E, 80 (5), 056103.
Redner, S. (1998). How popular is your paper? an empirical study of the citation distribution. The European Physical Journal B-Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, 4 (2), 131134.
Rhoten, D., & Parker, A. (2004). Risks and rewards of an interdisciplinary research path. Science(Washington), 306 (5704), 2046.
Sinatra, R., Deville, P., Szell, M., Wang, D., & Barabási, A.-L. (2015). A century of physics. Nature Physics, 11 (10), 791796.
Uzzi, B., Mukherjee, S., Stringer, M., & Jones, B. (2013). Atypical combinations and scientific impact. Science, 342 (6157), 468472.
Wagner, C. S., Roessner, J. D., Bobb, K., Klein, J. T., Boyack, K. W., Keyton, J.,. . .Börner, K. (2011). Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (idr): A review of the literature. Journal of Informetrics, 5 (1), 1426.
Walker, D., Xie, H., Yan, K.-K., & Maslov, S. (2007). Ranking scientific publications using a model of network traffic. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2007 (06), P06010.
Wang, D., Song, C., & Barabási, A.-L. (2013). Quantifying long-term scientific impact. Science, 342 (6154), 127132.
Wang, J. (2013). Citation time window choice for research impact evaluation. Scientometrics, 94 (3), 851872.
Zhang, Q., Perra, N., Gonçalves, B., Ciulla, F., & Vespignani, A. (2013). Characterizing scientific production and consumption in physics. Scientific Reports, 3, 1640.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Network Science
  • ISSN: 2050-1242
  • EISSN: 2050-1250
  • URL: /core/journals/network-science
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords

Type Description Title
PDF
Supplementary materials

Omodei supplementary material
Omodei supplementary material 1

 PDF (1.6 MB)
1.6 MB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 1
Total number of PDF views: 319 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 896 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 18th July 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.