IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v33y2006i6p423-434.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Between charisma and heuristics: four styles of interdisciplinarity

Author

Listed:
  • Martin Lengwiler

Abstract

The paper examines the practices of interdisciplinary research projects in nine extra-university research institutions in Germany. The research fields of these institutions include representative fields of current interdisciplinary research, such as climate change research, environmental studies, organizational research, and area studies. The analysis shows that the outcome of interdisciplinary research cooperation depends upon the micro-organization of research practices. There is, however, no singular recipe for a successful cooperation. Instead, the case studies show a multiplicity of adequate “styles of interdisciplinarity”: methodological, charismatic, heuristic and pragmatic interdisciplinarity. The differences between them depend upon the organizational and epistemic conditions of research practices. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin Lengwiler, 2006. "Between charisma and heuristics: four styles of interdisciplinarity," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(6), pages 423-434, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:33:y:2006:i:6:p:423-434
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154306781778821
    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. Heinze, Thomas & Kuhlmann, Stefan, 2008. "Across institutional boundaries?: Research collaboration in German public sector nanoscience," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 888-899, June.
    2. Bianca Vienni-Baptista & Isabel Fletcher & Catherine Lyall & Christian Pohl, 2022. "Embracing heterogeneity: Why plural understandings strengthen interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity [Defining Interdisciplinary Research: Conclusions from a Critical Review of the Literature]," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(6), pages 865-877.
    3. Shirley Vincent & Will Focht, 2011. "Interdisciplinary environmental education: elements of field identity and curriculum design," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 1(1), pages 14-35, March.
    4. Huutoniemi, Katri & Klein, Julie Thompson & Bruun, Henrik & Hukkinen, Janne, 2010. "Analyzing interdisciplinarity: Typology and indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 79-88, February.
    5. Shogo Katoh & Rick (H.L.) Aalbers & Shintaro Sengoku, 2021. "Effects and Interactions of Researcher’s Motivation and Personality in Promoting Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-19, November.

    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:scippl:v:33:y:2006:i:6:p:423-434. 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/spp .

    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.