, Volume 111, Issue 1, pp 317–336 | Cite as

Do interdisciplinary research teams deliver higher gains to science?

  • Giovanni Abramo
  • Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo
  • Flavia Di Costa


The present paper takes its place in the stream of studies that analyze the effect of interdisciplinarity on the impact of research output. Unlike previous studies, in this study the interdisciplinarity of the publications is not inferred through their citing or cited references, but rather by identifying the authors’ designated fields of research. For this we draw on the scientific classification of Italian academics, and their publications as indexed in the WoS over a 5-year period (2004–2008). We divide the publications in three subsets on the basis the nature of co-authorship: those papers coauthored with academics from different fields, which show high intensity of inter-field collaboration (“specific” collaboration, occurring in 110 pairings of fields); those papers coauthored with academics who are simply from different “non-specific” fields; and finally co-authorships within a single field. We then compare the citations of the papers and the impact factor of the publishing journals between the three subsets. The results show significant differences, generally in favor of the interdisciplinary authorships, in only one third (or slightly more) of the cases. The analysis provides the value of the median differences for each pair of publication subsets.


Interdisciplinary research Scientific impact Bibliometrics 


  1. Abramo, G., Cicero, T., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2012a). Revisiting the scaling of citations for research assessment. Journal of Informetrics, 6(4), 470–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Di Costa, F. (2012b). Identifying interdisciplinarity through the disciplinary classification of coauthors of scientific publications. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(11), 2206–2222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chen, S., Arsenault, C., & Larivière, V. (2015). Are top-cited papers more interdisciplinary? Journal of Informetrics, 9(4), 1034–1046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. D’Angelo, C. A., Giuffrida, C., & Abramo, G. (2011). A heuristic approach to author name disambiguation in bibliometrics databases for large scale research assessments. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(2), 257–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Larivière, V., & Gingras, Y. (2010). On the relationship between interdisciplinary and scientific impact. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(1), 126–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Levitt, J. M., & Thelwall, M. (2008). Is multidisciplinary research more highly cited? A macrolevel study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(12), 1973–1984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. OECD. (1972). Interdisciplinarity: Problems of teaching and research in universities. Washington, DC: OECD Publications Center.Google Scholar
  8. Porter, A. L., Cohen, A. S., Roessner, J. D., & Perreault, M. (2007). Measuring researcher interdisciplinarity. Scientometrics, 72(1), 117–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Porter, A. L., Roessner, D. J., & Heberger, A. E. (2008). How interdisciplinary is a given body of research? Research Evaluation, 17, 273–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Rinia, E., Van Leeuwen, T., Van Vuren, H., & Van Raan, A. (2001). Influence of interdisciplinarity on peer-review and bibliometric evaluations in physics research. Research Policy, 30(3), 357–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Schummer, J. (2004). Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology. Scientometrics, 59(3), 425–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Steele, T. W., & Stier, J. C. (2000). The impact of interdisciplinary research in the environmental sciences: A forestry case study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 51(5), 476–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Wagner, C. S., Roessner, J. D., Bobb, K., Klein, J. T., Boyack, K. W., Keyton, J., et al. (2011). Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): A review of the literature. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 14–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Wang, J., Thijs, B., & Glänzel, W. (2015). Interdisciplinarity and impact: Distinct effects of variety, balance, and disparity. PLoS ONE. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0127298.Google Scholar
  15. Wang, J., Veugelers, R., & Stephan, P. (2016). Bias against novelty in science: A cautionary tale for users of bibliometric indicators. NBER working paper No. 22180.Google Scholar
  16. Yegros-Yegros, A., Rafols, I., & D’Este, P. (2015). Does interdisciplinary research lead to higher citation impact? The different effect of proximal and distal interdisciplinarity. PLoS ONE. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0135095.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giovanni Abramo
    • 1
  • Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo
    • 1
    • 2
  • Flavia Di Costa
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratory for Studies in Research Evaluation, Institute for System Analysis and Computer Science (IASI-CNR)National Research Council of ItalyRomeItaly
  2. 2.Department of Engineering and ManagementUniversity of Rome “Tor Vergata”RomeItaly

Personalised recommendations