Interdisciplinarity in behaviour and memory research

Abstract

Ten years ago, I was interviewed as part of a colleague’s research project on humanities–industry collaborations (Cassity and Ang, 2006). Having just been interviewed about interdisciplinary research for another project (http://motionbank.org/en/content/dance-engaging-science), I wondered what has changed in 10 years and, perhaps more importantly, what have we learned? Within the decade, there have been workshops, research projects and handbooks about the challenges, methods and successes of interdisciplinary research (e.g. Bracken and Oughton, 2006; Frodeman et al., 2010; Rhoten, 2004; Scripps et al., 2013). Journals such as Memory Studies have appeared for a new field that is driven by problem or topic rather than by a single method or tradition (Hoskins et al., 2008), therefore providing a forum for reporting interdisciplinary research. I have always regarded my own research in human cognition as interdisciplinary – using the laboratory-based methods of experimental psychology (hypothesis testing, setting up experimental conditions by manipulating variables and inferring cognitive processes from behavioural indicators such as accuracy and reaction time) to investigate the stimulus features and environmental cues that enable learning, recognition and recall of non-verbal phenomena such as music and dance. However, a series of collaborative projects with artists and researchers in contemporary dance made me realize that there can be more to interdisciplinarity than applying the method from one discipline to a problem or materials from another. Questions may be interdisciplinary, so too research outcomes. I’ll sketch the development of a cognitive science–dance collaboration to illustrate. Starting in 1999, I worked with Shirley McKechnie and the late Robin Grove, both dance writers and scholars with prior careers as dance artists. The first project ‘Unspoken Knowledges’ (1999–2001) provided Australian choreographers and dance artists with the time to explore, test and revise material for the creation and analysis of new works. ‘Conceiving Connections’ (2002– 2005) investigated ways to enrich and capture audience response to dance (http://ausdance.org.au/ publications/details/choreographic-cognition-researching-dance-1999-2008). Making and documenting new dance were at the core of the initial project. I sat in the studio watching choreographer and dancers improvising, showing, sequencing and refining movement material. As I observed the creative process and its many facets and dimensions in real time, the methods of experimental psychology seemed ill-suited and intrusive. Instead, we used descriptive methods: observation, video and journal documentation and subsequent theoretical analysis (e.g.