Research incubator: Expert discussion – Processes

The vagueness of the concept of interdisciplinarity is reflected explicitly and implicitly in the discussion groups. The majority of the interviewees understand interdisciplinarity more as a coexistence than as a cooperation (integration) of disciplinary approaches in answering research questions. Compared to professors and postdocs, the statements of doctoral students indicate a much more integrative understanding of interdisciplinarity. In other words, they tend to pursue the genuine integration of knowledge and the softening of disciplinary boundaries in the context of their scientific work. They seem to act more in terms of a specific collective research interest. At the same time, they document more initiative and thematic motivation for interdisciplinary work. Professors, on the other hand, tend to understand interdisciplinarity in terms of “importing” theories, concepts and methods from other disciplines and adapting them to their own disciplinary context.

Overall, the interviewed researchers mention more challenges than opportunities of interdisciplinary research. Challenges are located both on the individual and on the structural level. The individual challenges include needs that arise from the concrete interdisciplinary work context, such as finding a common language. The structural challenges include the impermeable association structures of the disciplines and a lack of representation of interdisciplinarity in the (German) science system. Another important structural challenge results from the rigid subject structures, namely the lack of interdisciplinary publication possibilities.

It is seen as an opportunity that interdisciplinary work supports the further development of disciplines. Thus, the strengths of individual subjects can be combined for one’s own subject. Furthermore, the confrontation with other disciplinary perspectives is beneficial for the individual development of the researchers: Once a common understanding of theories, data and methods has been found, interdisciplinary research can be individually very enriching and inspiring. This creates competitive advantages for the institutions at which the researchers work.

Our study provides valuable indications of how interdisciplinary research can also be designed in practical terms. Structural framework conditions that are tailored to the work situation are important. In concrete interdisciplinary work, an external authority could support the researchers in overcoming disciplinary boundaries. This refers to the guidance of a so-called facilitator, who structures the process responsibly. This targeted occupation of a generalist role enables the representatives of individual disciplines to maintain their expertise and still find a common language with regard to theories, data and methods. According to the interviewees, an integrative understanding of interdisciplinarity can be developed in this way. In the long term, however, innovative research would also require changes to “traditional” scientific structures. For example, there should be more opportunities to learn integrative interdisciplinary work, and disciplinary societies should be more open. Furthermore, research should be designed in a participatory way. This includes not only the perspectives from practice (application orientation), but also the population as a resource (citizen science).