Abstract
This paper investigates the interdisciplinary relations of nanotechnology (Nano), biotechnology (Bio), information technology (Info), and cognitive science (Cogno) (together known as NBIC converging technologies) using different bibliometric techniques. For each set of two (pairs) and three (trios) of subjects, overlaps in journal citation, authorship, publication journals, and keywords were calculated for all Iranian NBIC articles published from 2001 to 2015 in international journals. Maximum and minimum spanning trees were used to visualise the interdisciplinary relations. To determine the nature of convergence between the subjects, an expert panel categorised the shared keywords of each pair and trio of subjects using four categories of tools, material, applications and techniques. The results showed that overall the pairs of Nano–Bio and Nano–Info had the highest level of mutual interdisciplinary relations. Info–Bio and Cogno–Bio had the weakest mutual interdisciplinary relations. Among the trios, Nano–Info–Bio had the strongest relations and Cogno–Nano–Info had the weakest. The dominant type of convergence for Nano–Bio and Cogno–Bio was sharing materials. For Nano–Info the dominant type of convergence was sharing tools and techniques. For Info–Cogno, and Info–Bio sharing techniques was the dominant type of convergence, and for Nano–Cogno sharing materials and applications was most dominant. Nano–Info–Bio mostly shared materials and applications. Identifying weak and strong ties between the four NBIC fields can help plan for their further convergence at science and technology levels.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Costa, F. (2012). Identifying interdisciplinarity through the disciplinary classification of coauthors of scientific publications. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 63(11), 2206–2222. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22647.
Altmann, D., Andler, K., Bruland, K., Nakicenovic, N., & Nordmann, A. (2004). Converging technologies-shaping the future of European societies. Retrieved December 20, 2017, from http://pure.iiasa.ac.at/12590/1/Converging%20Technologies.pdf.
Asadi, S., Rasouli, B., Atash Deligani, F., & Shaian Majd, M. (2018). Bibliometrics in practice in developing nations: A study on the development of scientometrics and bibliometrics careers in Iran. Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice, accepted (in press).
Bassecoulard, E., Lelu, A., & Zitt, M. (2007). Mapping nanosciences by citation flows: A preliminary analysis. Scientometrics, 70(3), 859–880. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-0315-1.
Bergmann, T., Dale, R., Sattari, N., Heit, E., & Bhat, H. S. (2017). The interdisciplinarity of collaborations in Cognitive Science. Cognitive Science, 41(5), 1412–1418. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12352.
Borgman, C. L., & Rice, R. E. (1992). The convergence of information science and communication: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43(6), 397.
Borner, K., Maru, J. T., & Goldstone, R. L. (2004). The simultaneous evolution of author and paper networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(Suppl), 5266–5273. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0307625100.
Buter, R. K., Noyons, E. C., & Van Raan, A. F. (2010). Searching for converging research using field to field citations. Scientometrics, 86(2), 325–338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0246-0.
Chen, S., Arsenault, C., Gingras, Y., & Larivière, V. (2015). Exploring the interdisciplinary evolution of a discipline: The case of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. Scientometrics, 102(2), 1307–1323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1457-6.
Diestel, R. (2017). Graph theory. Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53622-3.
Goldstone, R. L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2006). The import and export of cognitive science. Cognitive science, 30(6), 983–993. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0000_96.
Grigg, L. (1999). Cross-disciplinary research: A discussion paper (Commissioned Report No. 61). Canberra: Australian Research Council.
Innovation and Prosperity Fund. (2017). Brief report of Iran’s innovation and prosperity fund. Retrieved December 20, 2017, from http://nsfund.ir/fa2/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/SummaryReport.pdf. (in Persian)
Jamali, H. R., Asadi, S., & Azadi-Ahmadabadi, G. (2017). Bibliometric study of interdisciplinary relations of converging technologies (Nano–Bio–Info–Cogno). In Proceedings of ISSI 2017—the 16th international conference on scientometrics and informetrics (pp. 721–731), Wuhan University, China.
Jeong, S., Kim, J. C., & Choi, J. Y. (2015). Technology convergence: What developmental stage are we in? Scientometrics, 104(3), 841–871. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1606-6.
Kostoff, R. N. (1993). Co-word analysis. In B. Bozeman (Eds.), Evaluating R&D impacts: Methods and practice (pp. 63–78). Boston, MA: Springer.
Leydesdorff, L., Wagner, C. S., & Bornmann, L. (2018). Betweenness and diversity in journal citation networks as measures of interdisciplinarity—A tribute to Eugene Garfield. Scientometrics, 114(2), 567–592.
Maghrebi, M., Abbasi, A., Amiri, S., Monsefi, R., & Harati, A. (2011). A collective and abridged lexical query for delineation of nanotechnology publications. Scientometrics, 86(1), 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0304-7.
Milojević, S. (2012). Multidisciplinary cognitive content of nanoscience and nanotechnology. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 14(1), 685. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-011-0685-4.
Porter, A. L., Cohen, A. S., Roessner, J. D., & Perreault, M. (2007). Measuring researcher interdisciplinarity. Scientometrics, 72(1), 117–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1700-5.
Porter, A. L., Roessner, J. D., Cohen, A. S., & Perreault, M. (2006). Interdisciplinary research: Meaning, metrics and nurture. Research Evaluation, 15(3), 187–196.
Porter, A. L., & Youtie, J. (2009). How interdisciplinary is nanotechnology? Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 11(5), 1023–1041. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-009-9607-0.
Rafols, I., & Meyer, M. (2010). Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity: Case studies in bionanoscience. Scientometrics, 82(2), 263–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0041-y.
Rafols, I., Porter, A., & Leydesdorff, L. (2010). Science overlay maps: A new tool for research policy and library management. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(9), 1871–1887. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21368.
Roco, M. C., & Bainbridge, W. S. (2002). Converging technologies for improving human performance: Integrating from the nanoscale. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 4(4), 281–295.
Stopar, K., Drobne, D., Eler, K., & Bartol, T. (2016). Citation analysis and mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology: Identifying the scope and interdisciplinarity of research. Scientometrics, 106(2), 563–581. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1797-x.
Van Est, R., Stemerding, D., Rerimassie, V., Schuijff, M., Timmer, J., & Brom, F. (2014). From Bio to NBIC convergence-From medical practice to daily life. Report written for the Council of Europe, Committee on Bioethics, The Hague, Rathenau Instituut. Retrieved December 20, 2017, from https://www.rathenau.nl/en/file/177/download?token=nNFGKPTr.
Van Raan, A. F. J. (1999). The interdisciplinary nature of science: Theoretical framework and bibliometrics empirical approach. In P. Weingart (Eds.), Practising interdisciplinarity (pp. 66–78). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Wagner, C. S., Roessner, J. D., Bobb, K., Klein, J. T., Boyack, K. W., Keyton, J., et al. (2011). Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): A review of the literature. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.06.004.
Wang, L., Notten, A., & Surpatean, A. (2013). Interdisciplinarity of nano research fields: a keyword mining approach. Scientometrics, 94(3), 877–892. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0856-9.
Acknowledgement
The present study is an extended version of an article (Jamali, Asadi and Azadi-Ahmadabadi, 2017) presented at the 16th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, Wuhan (China), 16–20 October 2017.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jamali, H.R., Azadi-Ahmadabadi, G. & Asadi, S. Interdisciplinary relations of converging technologies: Nano–Bio–Info–Cogno (NBIC). Scientometrics 116, 1055–1073 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2776-9
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2776-9