IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0312938.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring qualities needed for interdisciplinary work: The Intellectual Virtues for Interdisciplinary Research Scale (IVIRS)

Author

Listed:
  • Claudia E Vanney
  • Belén Mesurado
  • J Ignacio Aguinalde Sáenz

Abstract

Previous work has suggested that the problems hindering the success of interdisciplinarity could be overcome by fostering certain intellectual character strengths in scholars. However, how to assess and cultivate the specific virtues required for interdisciplinarity among researchers is still a matter of inquiry. The general objective of this paper was to develop a psychometric instrument to assess intellectual virtues that are essential for interdisciplinary inquiry among researchers. To achieve this goal, two studies were conducted. Study 1 developed a new scale and studied its correlation with other validated measures. Study 2 focused on conducting a confirmatory analysis of the structure obtained in Study 1 and investigated the relationships between the new scale and the researchers’ levels of (i) experience and productivity in interdisciplinary collaboration and (ii) satisfaction regarding the results of their interdisciplinary inquiry. The EFA conducted for Study 1 identified four dimensions: (1) intellectual empathy, (2) open-mindedness and intellectual humility, (3) intellectual perseverance, and (4) curiosity. Indeed, the pools of items that were initially developed to measure intellectual humility and open-mindedness in a separate way converged into a unique factor or dimension. The confirmatory factor analysis conducted for Study 2 corroborated the four-dimensional structure observed in Study 1 via a new different sample. In addition, Studies 1 and 2 also analyzed convergent validity through the AVE and correlated the IVIRS with other scales that measure intellectual virtues (open-mindedness, curiosity, intellectual humility, and perseverance) in a general epistemic context. The second study demonstrated that researchers with significant experience, productivity, and satisfaction in the context of interdisciplinary investigation also presented elevated levels of the intellectual virtues that we identified as essential for such research. Our analysis demonstrates that the IVIRS is a valid measure of the intellectual virtues needed for interdisciplinarity and paves the way for the future design of interventions to cultivate these character traits in scholars.

Suggested Citation

  • Claudia E Vanney & Belén Mesurado & J Ignacio Aguinalde Sáenz, 2024. "Measuring qualities needed for interdisciplinary work: The Intellectual Virtues for Interdisciplinary Research Scale (IVIRS)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(11), pages 1-26, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0312938
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0312938
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0312938
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0312938&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0312938?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Veronica Boix Mansilla & Irwin Feller & Howard Gardner, 2006. "Quality assessment in interdisciplinary research and education," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(1), pages 69-74, April.
    2. Albert Satorra & Willem Saris, 1985. "Power of the likelihood ratio test in covariance structure analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 83-90, March.
    3. Leahey, Erin, 2018. "The Perks and Perils of Interdisciplinary Research," European Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(S2), pages 55-67, October.
    4. Mark Alfano & Kathryn Iurino & Paul Stey & Brian Robinson & Markus Christen & Feng Yu & Daniel Lapsley, 2017. "Development and validation of a multi-dimensional measure of intellectual humility," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-28, August.
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:3:p:188-201 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Xuefeng Wang & Zhinan Wang & Ying Huang & Yun Chen & Yi Zhang & Huichao Ren & Rongrong Li & Jinhui Pang, 2017. "Measuring interdisciplinarity of a research system: detecting distinction between publication categories and citation categories," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 2023-2039, June.
    7. 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.
    8. Bethany K Laursen & Nicole Motzer & Kelly J Anderson, 2022. "Pathways for assessing interdisciplinarity: A systematic review," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(3), pages 326-343.
    9. Uriel Haran & Ilana Ritov & Barbara A. Mellers, 2013. "The role of actively open-minded thinking in information acquisition, accuracy, and calibration," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 8(3), pages 188-201, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Giulio Giacomo Cantone, 2024. "How to measure interdisciplinary research? A systemic design for the model of measurement," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(8), pages 4937-4982, August.
    2. Shunshun Shi & Wenyu Zhang & Shuai Zhang & Jie Chen, 2018. "Does prestige dimension influence the interdisciplinary performance of scientific entities in knowledge flow? Evidence from the e-government field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 1237-1264, November.
    3. Bethany K & Nicole Motzer & Kelly J, 2023. "Pathway profiles: Learning from five main approaches to assessing interdisciplinarity," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 213-227.
    4. repec:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2024:i:2:p:213-227. is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Deng Cheng & Zhang Xue & Yang Zhibo & Zhang Mingze, 2025. "Impact of interdisciplinarity on disruptive innovation: the moderating role of collaboration pattern and collaboration size," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(4), pages 2379-2401, April.
    6. Oviedo-García, M. Ángeles, 2016. "Tourism research quality: Reviewing and assessing interdisciplinarity," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 586-592.
    7. Sander Zwanenburg & Maryam Nakhoda & Peter Whigham, 2022. "Toward greater consistency and validity in measuring interdisciplinarity: a systematic and conceptual evaluation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7769-7788, December.
    8. Maryam Nakhoda & Peter Whigham & Sander Zwanenburg, 2023. "Quantifying and addressing uncertainty in the measurement of interdisciplinarity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(11), pages 6107-6127, November.
    9. Jian Xu & Yi Bu & Ying Ding & Sinan Yang & Hongli Zhang & Chen Yu & Lin Sun, 2018. "Understanding the formation of interdisciplinary research from the perspective of keyword evolution: a case study on joint attention," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 973-995, November.
    10. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo & Flavia Costa, 2012. "Identifying interdisciplinarity through the disciplinary classification of coauthors of scientific publications," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(11), pages 2206-2222, November.
    11. Rafols, Ismael & Leydesdorff, Loet & O’Hare, Alice & Nightingale, Paul & Stirling, Andy, 2012. "How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1282.
    12. Gerd Lupp & Aude Zingraff-Hamed & Josh J. Huang & Amy Oen & Stephan Pauleit, 2020. "Living Labs—A Concept for Co-Designing Nature-Based Solutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-22, December.
    13. Ran Xu & Navid Ghaffarzadegan, 2018. "Neuroscience bridging scientific disciplines in health: Who builds the bridge, who pays for it?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 1183-1204, November.
    14. Ingyu Oh & Kyeong-Jun Kim & Chris Rowley, 2023. "Female Empowerment and Radical Empathy for the Sustainability of Creative Industries: The Case of K-Pop," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-18, February.
    15. Froese, Anna & Woiwode, Hendrik & Suckow, Silvio, 2019. "Mission Impossible? Neue Wege zu Interdisziplinarität: Empfehlungen für Wissenschaft, Wissenschaftspolitik und Praxis," Discussion Papers, Research Group Science Policy Studies SP III 2019-601, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    16. Ke-Hai Yuan & Wai Chan, 2005. "On Nonequivalence of Several Procedures of Structural Equation Modeling," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 70(4), pages 791-798, December.
    17. Saïd Unger & Lukas Erhard & Oliver Wieczorek & Christian Koß & Jan Riebling & Raphael H Heiberger, 2022. "Benefits and detriments of interdisciplinarity on early career scientists’ performance. An author-level approach for U.S. physicists and psychologists," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(6), pages 1-20, June.
    18. Ke-Hai Yuan & Peter Bentler, 2006. "Mean Comparison: Manifest Variable Versus Latent Variable," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 71(1), pages 139-159, March.
    19. Albert Satorra, 1989. "Alternative test criteria in covariance structure analysis: A unified approach," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 54(1), pages 131-151, March.
    20. Adriana Zaiț & Constantin Bratianu & Elena‐Mădălina Vătămănescu & Andreia Gabriela Andrei & Ioana Alexandra Horodnic, 2021. "Interdisciplinarity: A complexity approach towards academic research," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 294-306, May.
    21. Isler, Ozan & Gächter, Simon, 2022. "Conforming with peers in honesty and cooperation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 75-86.

    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:plo:pone00:0312938. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.