In this paper we report on the results of an exploratory study of knowledge exchange between disciplines and subfields of science, based on bibliometric methods. The goal of this analysis is twofold. Firstly, we consider knowledge exchange between disciplines at a global level, by analysing cross-disciplinary citations in journal articles, based on the world publication output in 1999. Among others a central position of the Basic Life Sciences within the Life Sciences and of Physics within the Exact Sciences is shown. Limitations of analyses of interdisciplinary impact at the journal level are discussed. A second topic is a discussion of measures which may be used to quantify the rate of knowledge transfer between fields and the importance of work in a given field or for other disciplines. Two measures are applied, which appear to be proper indicators of impact of research on other fields. These indicators of interdisciplinary impact may be applied at other institutional levels as well.
Knowledge Transfer Science Citation Index Publication Share Bibliometric Method Interdisciplinary Knowledge
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Casimir, H. B. G., Haphazard Reality: Half a Century of Science, New York: Harper and Row, 1983.Google Scholar
Mansfield, E., Academic research and industrial innovation: an update of empirical findings, Research Policy, 26 (7–8) (1998) 773–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salter, A. J., B. R. Martin, The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: A critical review, Research Policy, 30 (3) (2001) 509–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Narin, F., K. S. Hamilton, D. OLIVASTRO, The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science, Research Policy, 26 (3) (1997) 317–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Pair, C., Switching between academic disciplines in universities in the Netherlands, Scientometrics, 2 (1980) 177–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hargens, L. L., Migration Patterns of U.S. Ph.D.s among disciplines and specialties, Scientometrics, 9 (1986) 145–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porter, A. L., D. E. Chubin, An indicator of cross-disciplinary research, Scientometrics 8 (3—4) (1985) 161–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Urata, H., Information flows among academic disciplines in Japan, Scientometrics, 18 (3–4) (1990) 309–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steele, T. W., J. C. Stier, The impact of interdisciplinary research in the environmental sciences: a forestry case study, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(5) (2000) 478–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morillo, F., M. Bordons, I. Gomez, An approach to interdisciplinarity through bibliometric indicators, Scientometrics, 51(1) (2001) 203–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierce, S. J., Boundary crossing in research literatures as a means of information transfer, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(3) (1999) 271–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Science Board, Science & Engineering Indicators — 2000, Arlington, VA, National Science Foundation, 2000, pp. 6–45.Google Scholar
Kostoff, R. N., J. A. del Rio, The impact of physics research, Physics World, 14(6) (2001) 47–51.Google Scholar
Rinia, E. J., Th. n. van Leeuwen, E. E. W. Bruins, H. G. van Vuren, A. F. J. Van Raan, Citation delay in interdisciplinary knowledge exchange, Scientometrics, 51(1) (2001) 293–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egghe, L., R. Rousseau, M. Yitzaki, The ‘own-language preference’: measures of ‘relative language self-citation’, Scientometrics, 45 (1999) 217–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egghe, L., R. Rousseau, Partial orders and measures for language preferences, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51 (12) (2000) 1123–1130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidse, R. J., A. F. J. Van Raan, Out of particles: Impact of CERN, DESY and SLAC research to fields other than physics, Scientometrics, 40 (1997) 171–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar