Exploring Intellectual Network Structure of an Interdisciplinary Research Community: A Case Study of Taiwan’s STS Community

Applying methods in bibliometrics and social network analysis (SNA), the paper sets out to examine interdisciplinary knowledge transfer and synthesis of the Science, Technology and Society Studies (STS) community in Taiwan. Based on 61 STS members’ journal articles, the researcher created two relational matrices to represent the intellectual structure of the community, one through bibliometric coupling technique; the other, author co-citation technique. By applying several SNA techniques, we were able to analyze the intellectual configuration of STS community across different disciplinary boundaries. Research findings show that the network connection density tends to be low and that there are several central figures exerting greater influence on network cohesion. Based on actors’ “structural equivalence”, the network was divided into 7 to 8 subgroups that occupy different structural positions in the network. The withinand betweensubgroup connection was further analyzed. The findings suggest that the network is woven on the basis of research topics and issues instead of disciplines. The connection among sub-groups points to the existence of knowledge redundancy, which could be critical in maintaining network cohesion in a heterogeneous community.

[1]  Barry Wellman,et al.  Does citation reflect social structure?: Longitudinal evidence from the Globenet interdisciplinary research group , 2004, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[2]  Caroline Haythornthwaite,et al.  Learning and knowledge networks in interdisciplinary collaborations , 2006, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[3]  Panayiotis Zaphiris,et al.  Introduction to social network analysis , 2007, BCS HCI.

[4]  Julie Thompson Klein,et al.  A PLATFORM FOR A SHARED DISCOURSE OF INTERDISCIPLINARY EDUCATION , 2006 .

[5]  A. Elzinga The New Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies , 1997 .

[6]  John Ziman,et al.  Postacademic Science : Constructing Knowledge with Networks and Norms : Royal Society Medawar Lecture, 29 June 1995 , 2000 .

[7]  R. Leenders,et al.  Social capital of organizations: From social structure to the management of corporate social capital , 2001 .

[8]  N. Mullins,et al.  The Group Structure of Cocitation Clusters: A Comparative Study , 1977 .

[9]  S. Crawford,et al.  Informal communication among scientists in sleep research , 1971 .

[10]  Carole L. Palmer,et al.  Structures and strategies of interdisciplinary science , 1999 .

[11]  Robin Williams,et al.  Interdisciplinary integration in Europe: the case of the Fifth Framework programme , 2004 .

[12]  Alesia Zuccalá,et al.  Modeling the invisible college , 2006, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[13]  Leo Egghe,et al.  Little science, big science... and beyond , 1994, Scientometrics.

[14]  J. Bruhn,et al.  Beyond discipline: Creating a culture for interdisciplinary research , 1995, Integrative Physiological & Behavioral Science.

[15]  Gerald Zaltman A note on an international invisible college for information exchange , 1974, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[16]  Julie Thompson Klein,et al.  Interdisciplinarity and complexity: An evolving relationship* , 2004 .

[17]  Jenny Fry,et al.  The cultural shaping of scholarly communication: Explaining e-journal use within and across academic fields , 2004, ASIST.

[18]  C. Haythornthwaite Social network analysis: An approach and technique for the study of information exchange☆ , 1996 .

[19]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage , 1998 .

[20]  A. Porter,et al.  Interdisciplinary research: meaning, metrics and nurture , 2006 .

[21]  B. Verspagen,et al.  The Invisible College of The Economics of Innovation and Technological Change , 2003 .

[22]  R. Naiman A Perspective on Interdisciplinary Science , 1999, Ecosystems.