Disciplinary Diversity in Teams: Integrative Approaches from Unidisciplinarity to Transdisciplinarity

O’Rourke, Michael; Crowley, Stephen; Laursen, Bethany K.; Robinson, Brian; Vasko, Stephanie E.

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-20992-6_2

Cited by 32 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 119 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The CMO framework of cross-disciplinary HPSR draws attention to the fact that the approach is not defined by individual characteristics but by the combination of a particular type of research question and setting (context), a specific way of researchers working together (mechanism), and a certain research output (outcome) that is superior to what could be achieved under a monodisciplinary approach. Existing analysis of integration in CDR have not clearly illustrated the unique influence of CMO configurations in the integration process [ 15 , 102 , 103 ]. Our analysis of MDHPSR, IDHPSR and TDHPSR as three examples of cross-disciplinary approaches characterized by different CMO configurations on a continuum of increasing disciplinary integration allows a pragmatic debate about the appropriate degree of integration for a particular research problem and purpose.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A critical realist synthesis of cross-disciplinary health policy and systems research: defining characteristic features, developing an evaluation framework and identifying challenges

Dugle

Wulifan

Tanyeh

et al. 2020

Health Res Policy Sys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Health policy and systems research (HPSR) is an inherently cross-disciplinary field of investigation. However, conflicting conceptualisations about inter-, multi-and transdisciplinary research have contributed to confusion about the characteristics of cross-disciplinary approaches in HPSR. This review was conducted to (1) define the characteristic features of context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations in cross-disciplinary HPSR, (2) develop criteria for evaluating cross-disciplinarity and (3) synthesise emerging challenges of the approach. Method: The paper is a critical realist synthesis conducted in three phases, as follows: (1) scoping the literature, (2) searching for and screening the evidence, and (3) extracting and synthesising the evidence. Five databases, namely the International Bibliography of the Social Sciences and Web of Science, PubMed central, Embase and CINHAL, and reference lists of studies that qualified for inclusion in the review were searched. The search covered peerreviewed original research, reviews, commentary papers, and institutional or government reports published in English between January 1998 and January 2020. Results: A total of 7792 titles were identified in the online search and 137 publications, comprising pilot studies as well as anecdotal and empirical literature were selected for the final review. The review draws attention to the fact that cross-disciplinary HPSR is not defined by individual characteristics but by the combination of a particular type of research question and setting (context), a specific way of researchers working together (mechanism), and research output (outcome) that is superior to what could be achieved under a monodisciplinary approach. This CMO framework also informs the criteria for assessing whether a given HPSR is truly cross-disciplinary. The challenges of cross-disciplinary HPSR and their accompanying coping mechanisms were also found to be context driven, originating mainly from conceptual disagreements, institutional restrictions, communication and information management challenges, coordination problems, and resource limitations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A critical realist synthesis of cross-disciplinary health policy and systems research: defining characteristic features, developing an evaluation framework and identifying challenges

Dugle

Wulifan

Tanyeh

et al. 2020

Health Res Policy Sys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We base our work primarily in the principles of integrative research put forth by Hirsch and Brosius (2013), but which are shared with other formulations of integrative research (e.g. Miller et al 2008, O’Rourke et al 2019). We embrace epistemological pluralism (e.g.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An integrative approach to mosquito dynamics reveals differences in people’s everyday experiences of mosquitoes

Evans

Bhatnagar

Drake

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urban environments are heterogeneous landscapes of social and environmental features, with important consequences for human-nature entanglements, such as that of mosquito-borne disease. Investigations into this intra-urban heterogeneity in mosquito dynamics find conflicting results, likely due to the complex socio-ecological interactions and the importance of place-based context. Integrative research, which synthesizes multiple disciplines and epistemologies, can help place ecological results into their social context to explore these place-based differences. Here, we develop an integrative approach to understanding spatial patterns of mosquito burdens in urban systems by combining entomological surveys, semi-structured interviews, and sketch maps. Although we found no evidence for a difference in mosquito abundance across an urban gradient, there were differences in individuals' everyday experiences with mosquitoes. These differences were mediated by how individuals moved through public space and their vulnerability to hazards in these spaces. This example of integrative research illustrates what can be gained from the inclusion of multiple epistemologies, particularly for research in socio-ecological systems.

show abstract

“…The translation of research to stakeholder groups is a key factor that distinguishes translational research from other forms of transdisciplinary research. 77 Accordingly, ensuring a team is prepared to crystallize their findings and disseminate work to stakeholder groups is key.…”

Section: Translationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this phase, teams are still working toward a final goal of translating findings to stakeholder groups, but this phase also provides an opportunity for team reflection and learning. The translation of research to stakeholder groups is a key factor that distinguishes translational research from other forms of TD research [77]. Accordingly, ensuring a team is prepared to crystallize their findings and disseminate work to stakeholder groups is key.…”

Section: Translationmentioning

confidence: 99%

An integrative review and practical guide to team development interventions for translational science teams: One size does not fit all

Begerowski

Traylor

Shuffler

et al. 2021

J. Clin. Trans. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Disciplinary Diversity in Teams: Integrative Approaches from Unidisciplinarity to Transdisciplinarity

Cited by 32 publications

References 119 publications

A critical realist synthesis of cross-disciplinary health policy and systems research: defining characteristic features, developing an evaluation framework and identifying challenges

A critical realist synthesis of cross-disciplinary health policy and systems research: defining characteristic features, developing an evaluation framework and identifying challenges

An integrative approach to mosquito dynamics reveals differences in people’s everyday experiences of mosquitoes

An integrative review and practical guide to team development interventions for translational science teams: One size does not fit all

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About