Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Interdisciplinarity and impact: the effects of the citation time window

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The relationship between interdisciplinarity and citation impact is affected by many factors, and the citation time window is a crucial factor. Our study examines the effect of the citation time window on the relationship between interdisciplinarity and scientific impact. All journal articles published in 2006 in Web of Science (WoS) are considered. The relationship between interdisciplinarity and scientific impact is explored by conducting a year-by-year negative binomial regression analysis with different interdisciplinarity indicators. Three diversity single-property indicators (namely variety, balance, and disparity) and three typical composite interdisciplinarity indicators (Rao-Stirling index (RS), Leinster–Cobbold diversity indices (LCDiv), and DIV) are used in this study. The results show that evaluating the scientific impact of interdisciplinarity requires a sufficiently long citation time window. However, the length of the citation time window is different for different interdisciplinarity indicators. A 4-year citation time window is necessary when the variety indicator is used, whereas balance and disparity require at least 11-year and 13-year citation time windows, respectively. The citation time window is the same (at least 5 years) for the three composite interdisciplinarity indicators (RS, LCDiv, and DIV). The recommended length of the citation time window is based only on this study and may be affected by the data set, regression model, and discipline classification system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, J. (2005). Early citation counts correlate with accumulated impact. Scientometrics, 63(3), 567–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, J., Jackson, L., & Marshall, S. (2007). Bibliometric analysis of interdisciplinary research, Higher Education Funding Council for England.

  • Bornmann, L., Leydesdorff, L., & Wang, J. (2014). How to improve the prediction based on citation impact percentiles for years shortly after the publication date? Journal of Informetrics, 8(1), 175–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyack, K. & Klavans, R. (2014). Atypical combinations are confounded by disciplinary effects.

  • Cassi, L., Champeimont, R., Mescheba, W., & de Turckheim, E. (2017). Analysing institutions interdisciplinarity by extensive use of rao-stirling diversity index. PLoS ONE, 12(1), 44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, S., Arsenault, C., & Larivière, V. (2015). Are top-cited papers more interdisciplinary? Journal of Informetrics, 9(4), 1034–1046.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, S., Qiu, J., Arsenault, C., & Larivière, V. (2021). Exploring the interdisciplinarity patterns of highly cited papers. Journal of Informetrics, 15(1), 78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clermont, M., Krolak, J., & Tunger, D. (2021). Does the citation period have any effect on the informative value of selected citation indicators in research evaluations? Scientometrics, 126(2), 1019–1047.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorta-Gonzalez, P., & Dorta-Gonzalez, M. I. (2013). Impact maturity times and citation time windows: The 2-year maximum journal impact factor. Journal of Informetrics, 7(3), 593–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, L. (2001). Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search. Management Science, 47(1), 117–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W., Thijs, B., & Schubert, A. (2008). Methodological aspects of a new generation of relational charts for comparative assessment of citation impact. IV Seminario Internacional Sobre Estudios Cuantitativos y Cualitativos De La Ciencia y La Tecnologia, 56(6), 373–379.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J. S., & Hicks, D. (1997). How much is a collaboration worth? A calibrated bibliometric model. Scientometrics, 40(3), 541–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ke, Q., Ferrara, E., Radicchi, F., & Flammini, A. (2015). Defining and identifying sleeping beauties in science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(24), 7426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klavans, R. & Boyack, K. W. (2012). Towards the development of an article-level indicator of conformity, innovation and deviation. In 18th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, Berlin.

  • Lariviere, V., & Gingras, Y. (2010). On the relationship between interdisciplinarity and scientific impact. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(1), 126–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larivière, V., & Gingras, Y. (2014). Measuring Interdisciplinarity. In B. Cronin & C. R. Sugimoto (Eds.), Beyond Bibliometrics: Harnessing Multidimensional Indicators of Scholarly Impact (pp. 187–200). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larivière, V., Haustein, S., & Börner, K. (2015). Long-distance interdisciplinarity leads to higher scientific impact. PLoS ONE, 10(3), e0122565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leahey, E., Beckman, C. M., & Stanko, T. L. (2017). Prominent but less productive: The impact of interdisciplinarity on scientists’ research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 62(1), 105–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leinster, T., & Cobbold, C. A. (2012). Measuring diversity: The importance of species similarity. Ecology, 93(3), 477–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitt, J. M., & Thelwall, M. (2008). Is multidisciplinary research more highly cited? A macrolevel study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(12), 1973–1984.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitt, J. M., & Thelwall, M. (2009). The most highly cited Library and Information Science articles: Interdisciplinarity, first authors and citation patterns. Scientometrics, 78(1), 45–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L. (2007). Betweenness centrality as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of scientific journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(9), 1303–1319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L. (2018). Diversity and interdisciplinarity: How can one distinguish and recombine disparity, variety, and balance? Scientometrics, 116(3), 2113–2121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., Alkemade, F., Heimeriks, G., & Hoekstra, R. (2015). Patents as instruments for exploring innovation dynamics: Geographic and technological perspectives on “photovoltaic cells.” Scientometrics, 102(1), 629–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., Rafols, I., & Chen, C. (2013). Interactive Overlays of Journals and the Measurement of Interdisciplinarity on the Basis of Aggregated Journal-Journal Citations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(12), 2573–2586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., Wagner, C. S., & Bornmann, L. (2019a). Diversity measurement: Steps towards the measurement of interdisciplinarity? Journal of Informetrics, 13(3), 904–905.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., Wagner, C. S., & Bornmann, L. (2019b). Interdisciplinarity as diversity in citation patterns among journals: Rao-Stirling diversity, relative variety, and the Gini coefficient. Journal of Informetrics, 13(1), 255–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno, M. D. C. C., & Danowitz, M. A. (2016). Becoming an interdisciplinary scientist: An analysis of students’ experiences in three computer science doctoral programmes. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 38(4), 448–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morillo, F., Bordons, M., & Gómez, I. (2001). An approach to interdisciplinarity through bibliometric indicators. Scientometrics, 51(1), 203–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mugabushaka, A.-M., Kyriakou, A., & Papazoglou, T. (2016). Bibliometric indicators of interdisciplinarity: The potential of the Leinster-Cobbold diversity indices to study disciplinary diversity. Scientometrics, 107(2), 593–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Academies Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research, C. O. S., Engineering and Public Policy (COSEPUP). (2005). Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research. National Academies Press.

  • Nijssen, D., Rousseau, R., & Hecke, P. V. (1998). The Lorenz curve: A graphical representation of evenness. Coenoses, 13(1), 33–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, H. P. F., & Vanraan, A. F. J. (1994). On determinants of citation scores: a case-study in chemical-engineering. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45(1), 39–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, A., & Rafols, I. (2009). Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time. Scientometrics, 81(3), 719–745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, A. L., & Chubin, D. E. (1985). An indicator of cross-disciplinary research. Scientometrics, 8(3–4), 161–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, A. L., Cohen, A. S., Roessner, J. D., & Perreault, M. (2007). Measuring researcher interdisciplinarity. Scientometrics, 72(1), 117–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rafols, I., Leydesdorff, L., O’Hare, A., Nightingale, P., & Stirling, A. (2012). How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management. Research Policy, 41(7), 1262–1282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rafols, I., & Meyer, M. (2010). Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity: Case studies in bionanoscience. Scientometrics, 82(2), 263–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rinia, E., van Leeuwen, T., & van Raan, A. J. (2002). Impact measures of interdisciplinary research in physics. Scientometrics, 53(2), 241–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rinia, E. J. (2007). Measurement and evaluation of interdisciplinary research and knowledge transfer. Doctoral thesis, Leiden University.

  • Rousseau, R. (2018). The repeat rate: From hirschman to stirling. Scientometrics, 116(1), 645–653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, R. (2019). On the Leydesdorff-Wagner-Bornmann proposal for diversity measurement. Journal of Informetrics, 13(3), 906–907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schreiber, M. (2015). Restricting the h-index to a publication and citation time window: A case study of a timed Hirsch index. Journal of Informetrics, 9(1), 150–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seglen, P. O. (1992). The skewness of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43(9), 628–638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steele, T. W., & Stier, J. C. (2000). The impact of interdisciplinary research in the environmental sciences: A forestry case study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(5), 476–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stirling, A. (2007). A general framework for analysing diversity in science, technology and society. Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 4(15), 707–719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tahamtan, I., & Bornmann, L. (2018). Creativity in science and the link to cited references: Is the creative potential of papers reflected in their cited references? Journal of Informetrics, 12(3), 906–930.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, L. (2013). Does “birds of a feather flock together” matter-Evidence from a longitudinal study on US-China scientific collaboration. Journal of Informetrics, 7(2), 330–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uzzi, B., Mukherjee, S., Stringer, M., & Jones, B. (2013). Atypical combinations and scientific impact. Science, 342(6157), 468–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vieira, E. S., & Gomes, J. (2010). Citations to scientific articles: Its distribution and dependence on the article features. Journal of Informetrics, 4(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J. (2013). Citation time window choice for research impact evaluation. Scientometrics, 94(3), 851–872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J. (2016). Knowledge creation in collaboration networks: Effects of tie configuration. Research Policy, 45(1), 68–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J., Thijs, B., & Glänzel, W. (2015). Interdisciplinarity and impact: distinct effects of variety, balance, and disparity. PLoS ONE, 10(5), e0127298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J., Veugelers, R., & Stephan, P. (2017). Bias against novelty in science: A cautionary tale for users of bibliometric indicators. Research Policy, 46(8), 1416–1436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Q., & Schneider, J. W. (2020). Consistency and validity of interdisciplinarity measures. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(1), 239–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yegros-Yegros, A., Rafols, I., & D’Este, P. (2015). Does interdisciplinary research lead to higher citation impact? The different effect of proximal and distal interdisciplinarity. PLoS ONE, 10(8), 0135095.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, L., Rousseau, R., & Glänzel, W. (2016). Diversity of references as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of journals: Taking similarity between subject fields into account. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(5), 1257–1265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The first author acknowledges support from the National Social Science Foundation of China (Grant 20BTQ083).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chinese Academy of Science and Education Evaluation (CASEE), Hangzhou Dianzi University, Xiasha, Hangzhou, 310018, Zhejiang, China

    Shiji Chen & Fei Shu

  2. School of Management, Hangzhou Dianzi University, Xiasha, Hangzhou, 310018, Zhejiang, China

    Yanhui Song

  3. École de bibliothéconomie et des sciences de l’information, Université de Montréal, Canada Observatoire des Sciences et des Technologies (OST), Centre Interuniversitaire de Recherche sur la Science et la Technologie (CIRST), Université du Québec à Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Vincent Larivière

Authors
  1. Shiji Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yanhui Song
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fei Shu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Vincent Larivière
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yanhui Song.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, S., Song, Y., Shu, F. et al. Interdisciplinarity and impact: the effects of the citation time window. Scientometrics 127, 2621–2642 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04338-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04338-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation