Proceedings of ISSI 2005, pages 371–381. Edited by P. Ingwersen and B. Larsen. A Decade after Hicks and Katz: Interdisciplinary Research Re-Examined Ulf Sandström and Daniel Wadskog us@vr.se Swedish Research Council, Division for Policy Analysis SE-103 78 Stockholm, Sweden Abstract Following the innovative method from the SPRU paper by Hicks and Katz in 1996 we investigated different aspects of the interdisciplinary trends in Europe. The paper uses ISI data covering the period from 1982–2003. The trend towards multi- and interdisciplinarity in the natural, medical and technological sciences is growing stronger over time. In our analysis we use number of publications and citations in different areas of research, countries, sectors and universities. This gives an overview of interdiscplinarity as a phenomenon. Detailed Swedish data is used as a case study. The paper concludes with a short discussion on interdisciplinarity and research level. (April 18, 2005) Introduction In their innovative article from 1996, Hicks and Katz (then at SPRU) tested hypotheses that had been put forward by the Gibbons group (1994) and John Ziman (1994). Ten years ago many observers believed that interdisciplinary or even transdisciplinary research would become significant for nearly all types of research. It is no coincidence that the Gibbons book was financed by one of the Swedish agencies for boundary-spanning research, the FRN (The Swedish Council for Co-ordination and Planning of Research). That agency, politicians and officials from the Ministry of Education and Science supported ideas of a transdisciplinary transition during the 1990s. 1 In Sweden, when the liberal government came to power in 1991, several radical ideas on how to transform research in the direction of applicability and usability for industrial and political ends were brought to the political arena. Interdisciplinarity was among the ideas supported by the new research foundations created at that time. The regulations for these foundations stated that they should fund interdisciplinary research programs. 2 Since then, interdisciplinary research (IDR) is frequently included in Swedish governmental bills and investigations (Sandström 2005). Also, governmental directives to the research councils state that they should arrange for and give adequate support to IDR. The number of articles debating IDR issues increased during the 1990s, but since 2002 interest seems to be decreasing somewhat. 3 Approximately 1% of the articles in Web of Science (WoS) use IDR terms (multi- inter-, transdisciplinary) in title or abstract. Between 1991 and 2005, the number of these articles increased by 250% while the total number of articles during the same period increased by only 40%. The greatest numbers of articles are found in the subject areas of clinical medicine (surgery, public health, rehabilitation etc.), environmental science and educational sciences. 4 Is there an increasing trend towards interdisciplinarity in modern science? Our paper investigates this question, following the outline below: First, assuming that the proposed Hicks and Katz method of using multi-assigned journals is an interesting solution to the problem of how to measure interdisciplinary research, we will discuss the guidelines and replicate their study using data from Thomson/ISI Web of Science. 5 Also, we will investigate the frequency of interdisciplinary publications after the period covered in the Hicks and Katz paper (i.e. 1991–2003). 1 The history of Swedish policies for interdisciplinarity is analysed in Sandström et al. (2005). 2 Benner & Sandström (2000). 3 Cf. Sandström et al. (2005). 4 Source WoS, 1372 articles in 2002–2003, see Sandström et al (2005), cf. Braun & Schubert (2003). 5 Certain data included herein are derived from the Web of Science prepared by Thomson Scientific Inc. (ISI), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. Copyright Thomson Scientific Inc. 2005. All rights reserved.