IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/sscijp/v16y2013i2p251-277..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interdisciplinary Engagement as an Acculturation Process: The Case of Japanese Studies

Author

Listed:
  • Sierk A. HORN

Abstract

Linking regional expertise with disciplinary theory-motivated rigour is one of the key challenges for Japanese Studies. With Acculturation Theory as the theoretical basis, this paper develops and examines a framework that distinguishes variations in interdisciplinary engagement strategies among scholars working at the interstices of Japanese Studies and Business Studies. The findings should assist Area Studies scholarship in identifying how to shape relations with recipient Social Science disciplines—both at the individual and institutional level. We chart intergroup relations from two perspectives: (i) national and international institutions and (ii) interview data obtained from scholars working in Japanese Business Studies. We find variations in how Japanese Studies scholars interact with the field of Business Studies. These result from emphasis placed on the maintenance of Japanese Studies scholarship on the one hand and openness to engagement with the business discipline on the other. Integration, assimilation, separation, and marginalisation reflect realistic ‘sojourning’ (or interdisciplinary engagement) options available to Japanese Studies scholarship. By conceptualising interdisciplinarity as an acculturating change process, our framework offers a systematic understanding of why, how and to what effect Area Studies interacts with Social Science disciplines.

Suggested Citation

  • Sierk A. HORN, 2013. "Interdisciplinary Engagement as an Acculturation Process: The Case of Japanese Studies," Social Science Japan Journal, University of Tokyo and Oxford University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 251-277.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:sscijp:v:16:y:2013:i:2:p:251-277.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ssjj/jyt014
    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.

    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:sscijp:v:16:y:2013:i:2:p:251-277.. 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/ssjj .

    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.