Productivity, impact, and collaboration differences between transdisciplinary and traditionally trained doctoral students: A comparison of publication patterns

Abstract

Transdisciplinary (TD) approaches are increasingly used to address complex public health problems such as childhood obesity. Compared to traditional grant-funded scientific projects among established scientists, those designed around a TD, team-based approach yielded greater publication output after three to five years. However, little is known about how a TD focus throughout graduate school training may affect students’ publication-related productivity, impact, and collaboration. The objective of this study was to compare the publication patterns of students in traditional versus TD doctoral training programs. Productivity, impact, and collaboration of peer-reviewed publications were compared between traditional (n = 25) and TD (n = 11) students during the first five years of the TD program. Statistical differences were determined by t-test or chi square test at p < 0.05. The publication rate for TD students was 5.2 ± 10.1 (n = 56) compared to 3.6 ± 4.5 per traditional student (n = 82). Publication impact indicators were significantly higher for TD students vs. traditional students: 5.7 times more citations in Google Scholar, 6.1 times more citations in Scopus, 1.3 times higher journal impact factors, and a 1.4 times higher journal h-index. Collaboration indicators showed that publications by TD students had significantly more co-authors (1.3 times), and significantly more disciplines represented among co-authors (1.3 times), but not significantly more organizations represented per publication compared to traditional students. In conclusion, compared to doctoral students in traditional programs, TD students published works that were accepted into higher impact journals, were more frequently cited, and had more cross-disciplinary collaborations.

Preparing the next generation of sustainability scientists

“…Rather than providing services as an external center, the Integrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeship (IGERT) generated integrative research training and catalyzed cultural change at institutions across the United States to support collaborative cross-disciplinary research and sought to maintain a broad perspective and improve team-science skills (Borrego and Cutler 2010). These programs promoted institutional policy changes conducive to interdisciplinary collaboration, created new integrative graduate courses, and increased overall student participation in cross-disciplinary team science (Carney et al 2006, Borrego and Cutler 2010, Borrego et al 2014, Keck et al 2017.…”

Developing and evaluating a team development intervention to support interdisciplinary teams

“…23 Fortunately, the small body of existing empirical evidence suggests that interdisciplinary team development improves attitudes toward interdisciplinary collaborations, 10,35 enhances team trust, 10 increases knowledge relevant to the team's work, 10,35 improves role clarity, 10 enhances interpersonal communication skills, 10,36 and ultimately, increases team productivity, as measured by publications and citations. [36][37] Metaanalyses indicate that interventions focused on collaboration skills improve team performance as well as more proximal outcomes including cognitive, affective, and process-related outcomes. 6,38 This is highly encouraging for any organization seeking to invest in the success of teams beyond the provision of pilot funding.…”

“…A central question, of course, is whether a team science development program focused on any set of competencies related to interdisciplinary collaboration will be well-received by participants, and even more importantly, can create meaningful change [23]. Fortunately, the small body of existing empirical evidence suggests that interdisciplinary team development improves attitudes toward interdisciplinary collaborations [10,35], enhances team trust [10], increases knowledge relevant to the team's work [10,35], improves role clarity [10], enhances interpersonal communication skills [10,36], and ultimately, increases team productivity, as measured by publications and citations [36,37]. Meta-analyses indicate that interventions focused on collaboration skills improve team performance as well as more proximal outcomes including cognitive, affective, and process-related outcomes [6,38].…”

Graduate student perspectives on transforming academia

“…Examples of this include Duke University's Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions Environmental Impacts Fellowship and the Illinois Transdisciplinary Obesity Prevention Program. The former provides students the opportunity to explore a range of potential career paths via training focused on leadership, teaching, communication, and engagement (Duke University, 2021), while the latter requires participation in a broad spectrum of transdisciplinary classes and supervision by mentors from two or more disciplines (Keck et al, 2018). Synchronizing graduate benchmarks with interdisciplinary methodologies and goals would provide a structure through which we can pursue impact‐oriented goals while also making progress toward completion of our degrees.…”