The complexity of evaluating interdisciplinary (ID) and transdisciplinary (TD) research defies a single standard. Yet, common elements appear in the emergent literature. Five overriding themes stand out. (1) Quality is a relative concept, driven by variability of goals and criteria. (2) A coaching model of evaluation nurtures the research process. (3) Integration is central to the process. (4) Social and cognitive factors interact, requiring management of information and decision-making. (5) The need for change in peer review has led to a variety of strategies. ID and TD evaluation is a generative activity that entails acts of “capitalizing” and “harvesting” expertise while “calibrating” standards to produce new “cultures of evidence”.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2006 study studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: