<p>In the context of widespread concern about interdisciplinary phenomena, knowledge flows provide a dynamic and reliable perspective for understanding complex interdisciplinary phenomena. By reviewing the relevant literatures, it is found that existing studies usually calculate knowledge flows based on the full counting method. However, it remains uncertain which of these two methods, the full counting method or the fractional counting method, can measure the knowledge flow of interdisciplinary research more effective. Therefore, this study takes the field of biosecurity research as an example, designs the SP index based on the fractional counting method, and compares the full counting method with the fractional counting method in terms of knowledge flow, knowledge flow proportion, knowledge flow growth rate, etc. The results illustrate that, compared to the full counting method, the fractional counting method can provide a more fine-grained perspective, which reduces the data bias caused by a large number of citations from the same discipline in one article. Furthermore, this study divides the contribution of different disciplines into four types through SP index: Core Disciplines, Emerging Disciplines, Alternative Disciplines and Marginal Disciplines. Then, from the perspective of knowledge flow, in the same period of time, it is proposed that Core Disciplines contribute the most knowledge to the solution of biosecurity issues, while Marginal Disciplines contribute the least, among these four roles. Different researchers can select disciplines with different roles for interdisciplinary research according to their own needs. The research results also show that the roles of disciplines may change at different time stages. And the division of disciplinary roles further verifies that the fractional counting method can more accurately describe the flow of interdisciplinary knowledge. This study provides a reference for promoting further collaboration across disciplines and assisting stakeholders to identify appropriate disciplines for collaboration.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Measuring knowledge flow in the interdisciplinary field of biosecurity: full counting method or fractional counting method?

  • Xi Wang,
  • Dongqiao Li,
  • Xiwen Liu,
  • Zhiqiang Wang

摘要

In the context of widespread concern about interdisciplinary phenomena, knowledge flows provide a dynamic and reliable perspective for understanding complex interdisciplinary phenomena. By reviewing the relevant literatures, it is found that existing studies usually calculate knowledge flows based on the full counting method. However, it remains uncertain which of these two methods, the full counting method or the fractional counting method, can measure the knowledge flow of interdisciplinary research more effective. Therefore, this study takes the field of biosecurity research as an example, designs the SP index based on the fractional counting method, and compares the full counting method with the fractional counting method in terms of knowledge flow, knowledge flow proportion, knowledge flow growth rate, etc. The results illustrate that, compared to the full counting method, the fractional counting method can provide a more fine-grained perspective, which reduces the data bias caused by a large number of citations from the same discipline in one article. Furthermore, this study divides the contribution of different disciplines into four types through SP index: Core Disciplines, Emerging Disciplines, Alternative Disciplines and Marginal Disciplines. Then, from the perspective of knowledge flow, in the same period of time, it is proposed that Core Disciplines contribute the most knowledge to the solution of biosecurity issues, while Marginal Disciplines contribute the least, among these four roles. Different researchers can select disciplines with different roles for interdisciplinary research according to their own needs. The research results also show that the roles of disciplines may change at different time stages. And the division of disciplinary roles further verifies that the fractional counting method can more accurately describe the flow of interdisciplinary knowledge. This study provides a reference for promoting further collaboration across disciplines and assisting stakeholders to identify appropriate disciplines for collaboration.