Interdisciplinary Research: A Philosophy, Art Form, Artifact or Antidote?. Bruhn, J. G. 35(1):58–66.
Interdisciplinary Research: A Philosophy, Art Form, Artifact or Antidote? [link]Paper  doi  abstract   bibtex   
Interdisciplinary research has many faces – a philosophy, an art form, an artifact, and an antidote. It is all of these things because interdisciplinary research attempts to ask questions in ways that cut across disciplinary boundaries. This is not politically correct and universities especially find it difficult to manage interdisciplinarians and their projects. The author argues that interdisciplinary research has persisted as an alternative when traditional research approaches have failed to come up with answers to common problems. Interdisciplinary research will continue to survive as long as there are creative, risk-taking scientists who are dissatisfied with the political and organizational boundaries we establish around disciplines which limit our ability to learn about their commonalities.
@article{bruhnInterdisciplinaryResearchPhilosophy2000,
  title = {Interdisciplinary Research: A Philosophy, Art Form, Artifact or Antidote?},
  author = {Bruhn, John G.},
  date = {2000},
  journaltitle = {Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science},
  volume = {35},
  pages = {58--66},
  issn = {1936-3567},
  doi = {10.1007/bf02911166},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02911166},
  abstract = {Interdisciplinary research has many faces -- a philosophy, an art form, an artifact, and an antidote. It is all of these things because interdisciplinary research attempts to ask questions in ways that cut across disciplinary boundaries. This is not politically correct and universities especially find it difficult to manage interdisciplinarians and their projects. The author argues that interdisciplinary research has persisted as an alternative when traditional research approaches have failed to come up with answers to common problems. Interdisciplinary research will continue to survive as long as there are creative, risk-taking scientists who are dissatisfied with the political and organizational boundaries we establish around disciplines which limit our ability to learn about their commonalities.},
  keywords = {*imported-from-citeulike-INRMM,~INRMM-MiD:c-12728730,bias-correction,cognitive-biases,disciplinary-barrier,epistemology,interdisciplinary-research,overspecialization,scientific-creativity},
  number = {1}
}
Downloads: 0