No abstract

There is a lack of understanding regarding the optimal conditions for interdisciplinary research. This study investigates what characteristics of researchers are associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaborations and what collaborations are most rewarding in different scientific disciplines. Our results confirm that female scientists are more engaged in interdisciplinary research collaborations. Further, a scientist's years of research experience are positively related with both types of collaboration. Work experience in firms or governmental organizations increases the propensity of interdisciplinary collaborations, but decreases that of disciplinary collaborations. Disciplinary collaborations occur more frequent in basic disciplines; interdisciplinary collaborations more in strategic disciplines. We also found that in both types of disciplines, disciplinary collaborations contribute more to career development than interdisciplinary collaborations. We conclude with three recommendations for science and innovation policy, while emphasising the need to distinguish between different scientific disciplines.

The high value of collaboration among scientists and of interactions of university researchers with industry is generally acknowledged. In this study we explain the use of different knowledge networks at the individual level from a resource-based perspective. This involves viewing networks as a resource that offers competitive advantages to an individual university researcher in terms of career development. Our results show that networking and career development are strongly related, but it is important to distinguish between different types of networks. Although networks on various levels (faculty, university, scientific, industrial) show strong correlations, we found three significant differences. First, networking within one's own faculty and with researchers from other universities stimulates careers, while interactions with industry do not. Second, during the course of an academic career a researcher's scientific network activity first rises, but then declines after about 20 years. Science-industry collaboration, however, continuously increases. Third, the personality trait 'global innovativeness' positively influences science-science interactions, but not science-industry interactions.

This paper presents a framework to study the historical development of the relationship between science and society. We elaborate this relationship as a contract that specifies the mission of scientific research, the rationales for public support for science, and the conditions under which scientists work. These three structural elements will always be part of the contract, but their specific content can vary. The credibility cycle, as a model for scientific practice, helps to describe and understand the consequences of a changing contract for the work of individual scientists. A brief case study of chemistry in the Netherlands demonstrates the usefulness of the framework. We show how concepts of relevance have changed since 1975 and how this affects the practice of academic chemistry.