Integration by Parts: Collaboration and Topic Structure in the CogSci Community

Destefano, Isabella; Oey, Lauren A.; Brockbank, Erik; Vul, Edward

doi:10.1111/tops.12526

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, a bibliometric study based on the particular case of the journal Cognitive Science, which quantifies coauthorship networks, showed that this journal is among the best in this metric of interdisciplinarity compared to other journals in the social and natural sciences (Bergmann, Dale, Sattari, Heit, & Bhat, 2017). More recently, new studies show that, during the period between 2000 and 2019, the contributions to the Cognitive Science Society have become increasingly integrated, that is, more interdisciplinary and less multidisciplinary (DeStefano, Oey, Brockbank, & Vul, 2021). In addition, Alasehir and Acarturk (2022) also highlight that the scholarly domain of cognitive science has been exhibiting more manifest interdisciplinarity over the last decades.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intellectual Virtues for Interdisciplinary Research: A Consensual Qualitative Analysis

Vanney,

Mesurado,

Sáenz

et al. 2023

Cognitive Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Through a qualitative approach, this study identified a specific subgroup of intellectual virtues necessary for developing interdisciplinary research. Cognitive science was initially conceived as a new discipline emerging from various fields, including philosophy, psychology, artificial intelligence, linguistics, and anthropology. Thus, a frequent debate among cognitive scientists is whether the initial multidisciplinary program successfully developed into a mature interdisciplinary field or evolved into a set of independent sciences of cognition. For several years, interdisciplinarity has been an aspiration for the academy, although the difficulties limiting the success of interdisciplinary collaborations have begun to erode that initial optimism. Our analysis suggests that the problems hindering the success of interdisciplinarity can be overcome by fostering certain intellectual character strengths in scholars. The Consensual Qualitative Research method was used to analyze nine semi‐structured interviews involving researchers with a long personal trajectory of interdisciplinary research between the sciences and the humanities. Three virtue domains emerged from the interviews’ analysis: (i) intellectual virtues, (ii) social virtues, and (iii) interpersonal intellectual virtues. The virtues of the third domain intersect with intellectual and social ones. They are intellectual because they pursue epistemic goods. But, unlike other intellectual virtues, they only develop in interpersonal settings, so they can also be considered to have a social component. Interpersonal intellectual virtues can be thus defined as intellectual character traits that facilitate the acquisition of knowledge (intellectual motivation) with and through other people in a reciprocal way (social environment). These virtues are essential for developing any successful collective epistemic enterprise, interdisciplinary research being a privileged context where these qualities manifest themselves in a relevant way.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intellectual Virtues for Interdisciplinary Research: A Consensual Qualitative Analysis

Vanney,

Mesurado,

Sáenz

et al. 2023

Cognitive Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The fundamental importance of method to theory

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The scientometric landscape of Evolang: A comprehensive database of the Evolang conference

Wacewicz

Sibierska

Placiński

et al. 2022

Journal of Language Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Language evolution is a modern incarnation of a long intellectual tradition that addresses the fundamental question of how language began. Such a formulation is intuitively obvious, but a more precise characterisation of this area of research with its central notions—language and evolution—has proved surprisingly elusive. In this paper, we show how conceptual analysis can be complemented with scientometric analysis in describing language evolution. To this end, we built a database containing information on the contributions and contributors to the proceedings of the nine most recent iterations (years 2004–20) of the Evolang conference, which given its long history (1996–) and attendance rates gives a good reflection of the thematic scope and research trends in the field of language evolution as a whole. We present several analyses of these data, concerning the geographical distribution of the researchers contributing to the conference, a set of ‘classic’ references most frequently cited in Evolang proceedings, researcher profiles self-associated with the most popular tags for this area of research (such as ‘evolution of language’ vs. ‘language evolution’), and the changes to the profile of the conference as represented in the proportions of topics and author networks over the most recent Evolang iterations. While our resource is intended primarily as a source of insight into the Evolang conference—and by extension into the entire field of language evolution—it holds potential for comparisons with other fields and for addressing questions on the production of scientific knowledge.

show abstract

Integration by Parts: Collaboration and Topic Structure in the CogSci Community

Cited by 3 publications

References 29 publications

Intellectual Virtues for Interdisciplinary Research: A Consensual Qualitative Analysis

Intellectual Virtues for Interdisciplinary Research: A Consensual Qualitative Analysis

The fundamental importance of method to theory

The scientometric landscape of Evolang: A comprehensive database of the Evolang conference

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About