IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v12y2003i1p29-37.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring and assessing relative disciplinary openness in university research units

Author

Listed:
  • Thuc Uyen Nguyen Thi
  • Agenor Lahatte

Abstract

Since multidisciplinary composition of scientific staff can be regarded as a precondition of interdisciplinary work, one indicator for interdisciplinarity in research is the multidisciplinary background of 1,349 University Louis Pasteur staff in 74 laboratories, covering five disciplinary fields. Econometric estimation is based on internal characteristics of laboratories such as status, size, institutional origins of researchers and scientific departments. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Thuc Uyen Nguyen Thi & Agenor Lahatte, 2003. "Measuring and assessing relative disciplinary openness in university research units," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(1), pages 29-37, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:12:y:2003:i:1:p:29-37
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154403781776753
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Julia Melkers & Fang Xiao, 2012. "Boundary-spanning in emerging technology research: determinants of funding success for academic scientists," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 251-270, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:12:y:2003:i:1:p:29-37. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.